Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Gloat vs Wonderlic
Gloat
Gloat is an AI-powered internal talent marketplace and "agentic HR" platform that matches an employer's existing employees to internal job openings, gigs, projects, mentorships, and learning based on inferred skills and career goals.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
4 points separate Gloat and Wonderlic.
Gloat holds a 4-point edge over Wonderlic under rubric v1.0, 47 to 43, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Gloat leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Wonderlic leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. Data Governance Disclosure is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Gloat 58, Wonderlic 38 — and at a 15% weight it carries 48% of the weighted advantage Gloat holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Gloat5
- Wonderlic2
- Widest raw gap
- Data Governance Disclosure58 vs 38
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Data Governance Disclosure15% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Gloat is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Gloat | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1937 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight34% of the movement so far
Gloat58Wonderlic383.0 weighted points to Gloat
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight54% of the movement so far
Gloat38Wonderlic481.8 weighted points to Wonderlic
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight67% of the movement so far
Gloat62Wonderlic521.2 weighted points to Gloat
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight80% of the movement so far
Gloat42Wonderlic331.1 weighted points to Gloat
- 5
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight89% of the movement so far
Gloat48Wonderlic520.8 weighted points to Wonderlic
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight95% of the movement so far
Gloat62Wonderlic550.6 weighted points to Gloat
- 7
FRIA Support
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Gloat28Wonderlic250.4 weighted points to Gloat
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.7.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Gloat minus Wonderlic, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Gloat | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 52 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 38 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 33 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 47F | 43F | +4 | +3.7 |
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.
| Criterion | Weight | Gloat | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Gloat has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Gloat, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic last reviewed
- June 7, 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.