§ The result
isolved leads Mercer | Mettl by 5 points.
isolved scores 47 and Mercer | Mettl 42 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of isolved: isolved is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Mercer | Mettl on Data Governance Disclosure. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (isolved 50, Mercer | Mettl 38) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage isolved holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
Vendor profile
Mercer | Mettl
Mercer | Mettl is an online talent assessment and remote-proctoring platform offering psychometric, aptitude, coding, and skills tests plus AI-assisted exam proctoring and scoring for hiring, certification, and L&D.
§ The record
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Mercer | Mettl 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 Mercer | Mettl is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | isolved | Mercer | Mettl |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 1986 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Mercer | Mettl 38
2.4 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
isolved 55 · Mercer | Mettl 45
1.2 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Mercer | Mettl 38
1.1 weighted points to isolved
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Mercer | Mettl 42
0.5 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Mercer | Mettl 52
0.3 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · Mercer | Mettl 28
0.3 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · Mercer | Mettl 55
0.3 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Mercer | Mettl.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Mercer | Mettl | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 55 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 38 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 42 (F) | +5 | +5.5 |
§ 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 | isolved | Mercer | Mettl | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Mercer | Mettl has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercer | Mettl 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