§ The result
iMocha leads Wonderlic by 13 points.
iMocha sits 13 points above Wonderlic under rubric v1.0, 56 against 43, with both filed under Assessment. iMocha leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Wonderlic leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (iMocha 66, Wonderlic 38, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 31% of the weighted advantage iMocha holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
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
iMocha 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 | iMocha | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iMocha 66 · Wonderlic 38
4.2 weighted points to iMocha
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
iMocha 68 · Wonderlic 52
3.2 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iMocha 38 · Wonderlic 25
1.9 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iMocha 48 · Wonderlic 33
1.8 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
iMocha 64 · Wonderlic 52
1.4 weighted points to iMocha
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iMocha 66 · Wonderlic 55
0.9 weighted points to iMocha
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iMocha 44 · Wonderlic 48
0.7 weighted points to Wonderlic
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +12.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iMocha minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | iMocha | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 52 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 44 | 48 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 25 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 66 | 38 | +28 | +4.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 52 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 33 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +0.9 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 43 (F) | +13 | +12.8 |
§ 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 | iMocha | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iMocha 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