§ The result
Greenhouse leads Wonderlic on all 7 criteria.
Greenhouse finishes 24 points clear of Wonderlic under rubric v1.0 — 67 (D) against 43 (F) — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Wonderlic leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Greenhouse 86, Wonderlic 48, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
Vendor profile
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.
§ The record
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Wonderlic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Greenhouse | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · Wonderlic 48
6.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · Wonderlic 52
5.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · Wonderlic 38
3.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · Wonderlic 33
3.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · Wonderlic 25
2.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · Wonderlic 52
1.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · Wonderlic 55
0.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +23.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +24 beside that +23.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 52 | +26 | +5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 48 | +38 | +6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 38 | +26 | +3.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 52 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 33 | +25 | +3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 55 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 43 (F) | +24 | +23.9 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 32 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 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.
§ Where next