§ The result
2 points separate Versant by Pearson and isolved.
Versant by Pearson holds a 2-point edge over isolved under rubric v1.0, 49 to 47, across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Versant by Pearson leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while isolved leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 2 are level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — isolved 50, Versant by Pearson 63 — and at a 20% weight it carries 83% of the weighted advantage Versant by Pearson holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Versant by Pearson
Versant by Pearson is a suite of AI-scored English proficiency tests (plus spoken Spanish, French, Arabic and Dutch) that automatically score candidates' spoken and written responses on Pearson's Global Scale of English within minutes, used by employers such as contact centres and BPOs to screen applicants and benchmark staff through the ScoreKeeper dashboard.
§ The record
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Versant by Pearson 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 Versant by Pearson is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | isolved | Versant by Pearson |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1986 | 1844 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Versant by Pearson 63
2.6 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
18% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Versant by Pearson 42
0.5 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Versant by Pearson 43
0.5 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Versant by Pearson 61
0.4 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
isolved 55 · Versant by Pearson 56
0.1 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -2.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Versant by Pearson.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Versant by Pearson | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 63 | -13 | -2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 53 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 43 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 61 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 49 (F) | -2 | -2.1 |
§ 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 | Versant by Pearson | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 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 | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Versant by Pearson has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved and Versant by Pearson sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 29 for Versant by Pearson, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Versant by Pearson last reviewed
- September 25, 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