The result

Glider AI takes the total, Test Partnership takes more of the criteria.

Within the Assessment cohort, Glider AI edges Test Partnership by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 52 to 50. Test Partnership leads more of the criteria than Glider AI — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Glider AI leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Glider AI. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Glider AI 68, Test Partnership 48) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 81% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 2 criteria it leads.

Criteria won

7 criteria

  • Glider AI2
  • Test Partnership5
Widest raw gap
Bias Audit Transparency68 vs 48
Heaviest weighted swing
Bias Audit Transparency18% weight

Keep this comparison

Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.

Sent once, with links to turn on alerts for either vendor. No list.

The record

Categories, scope and company facts.

Glider AI and Test Partnership are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

RecordGlider AITest Partnership
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded20202012

What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. Bias Audit Transparency

    18% weight55% of the movement so far

    Glider AI68
    Test Partnership48

    3.6 weighted points to Glider AI

  2. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    20% weight70% of the movement so far

    Glider AI52
    Test Partnership57

    1.0 weighted points to Test Partnership

  3. Post-Market Monitoring

    12% weight83% of the movement so far

    Glider AI40
    Test Partnership33

    0.8 weighted points to Glider AI

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    15% weight90% of the movement so far

    Glider AI54
    Test Partnership57

    0.4 weighted points to Test Partnership

  5. Human Oversight Design

    12% weight95% of the movement so far

    Glider AI55
    Test Partnership58

    0.4 weighted points to Test Partnership

  6. Customer Documentation

    8% weight98% of the movement so far

    Glider AI60
    Test Partnership62

    0.2 weighted points to Test Partnership

  7. FRIA Support

    15% weight100% of the movement so far

    Glider AI35
    Test Partnership36

    0.1 weighted points to Test Partnership

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +2.3.

Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Glider AI minus Test Partnership, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.

CategoryWeightGlider AITest PartnershipΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5257-5-1.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%6848+20+3.6
FRIA Support15%3536-1-0.1
Data Governance Disclosure15%5457-3-0.4
Human Oversight Design12%5558-3-0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%4033+7+0.8
Customer Documentation8%6062-2-0.2
Total100%52F50F+2+2.3

Evidence

Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.

An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.

CriterionWeightGlider AITest Partnership
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain50Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain51Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%276Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain266Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Test Partnership has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI and Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Glider AI last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Test Partnership last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team

HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.

Where next