§ The result
HiringBranch leads Wonderlic on 6 of the 7 criteria.
HiringBranch scores 52 and Wonderlic 43 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. HiringBranch leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Wonderlic is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 HiringBranch leads is Post-Market Monitoring, HiringBranch 40 to Wonderlic 33. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HiringBranch 55, Wonderlic 38, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 27% of the weighted advantage HiringBranch holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiringBranch
HiringBranch is an AI skills-assessment platform that measures 50+ communication and soft skills from candidates' open-ended, conversational job-simulation responses (text and voice) to screen and rank applicants for customer-facing roles.
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
HiringBranch and Wonderlic are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HiringBranch | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | CA | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiringBranch 55 · Wonderlic 38
2.5 weighted points to HiringBranch
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiringBranch 60 · Wonderlic 48
2.2 weighted points to HiringBranch
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiringBranch 60 · Wonderlic 52
1.6 weighted points to HiringBranch
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiringBranch 35 · Wonderlic 25
1.5 weighted points to HiringBranch
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiringBranch 40 · Wonderlic 33
0.8 weighted points to HiringBranch
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiringBranch 64 · Wonderlic 55
0.7 weighted points to HiringBranch
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +9.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiringBranch minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | HiringBranch | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 38 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 55 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 43 (F) | +9 | +9.4 |
§ 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 | HiringBranch | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 13 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HiringBranch has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 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 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for HiringBranch, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiringBranch last reviewed
- July 17, 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