§ The result
Hogan Assessments leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Hogan Assessments sits 11 points above Turing under rubric v1.0, 47 against 36, with both filed under Assessment. Hogan Assessments is ahead of Turing on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at Hogan Assessments 52 to Turing 45. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Hogan Assessments 44, Turing 28, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 27% of the weighted advantage Hogan Assessments holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Hogan Assessments
Hogan Assessments provides science-based personality assessments - chiefly the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) - used to predict workplace performance for employee selection and development.
Vendor profile
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Hogan Assessments and Turing are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Hogan Assessments | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1987 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hogan Assessments 44 · Turing 28
2.9 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
15% weight · 42% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Hogan Assessments 36 · Turing 25
1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
20% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Hogan Assessments 50 · Turing 42
1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hogan Assessments 40 · Turing 27
1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Hogan Assessments 52 · Turing 44
1.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hogan Assessments 62 · Turing 48
1.1 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hogan Assessments 52 · Turing 45
0.8 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +10.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hogan Assessments minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Hogan Assessments | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 44 | 28 | +16 | +2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 36 | 25 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 44 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 27 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 36 (F) | +11 | +10.9 |
§ 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 | Hogan Assessments | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 3 | 1 | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hogan Assessments last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 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