§ The result
Jack & Jill leads Mercer | Mettl by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 49 and Mercer | Mettl, filed under Assessment, on 42, 7 points apart. Jack & Jill leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Mercer | Mettl leads 1, including Data Governance Disclosure, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Jack & Jill 62, Mercer | Mettl 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Jack & Jill
Jack & Jill is a London AI recruiting marketplace. Its free career agent, Jack, interviews and profiles candidates, and its employer-side AI recruiter, Jill, turns a role brief into a scoring rubric, ranks candidates from Jack's network (and optionally public profiles) with a percentage match, and arranges introductions only when both sides agree.
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
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Mercer | Mettl under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Mercer | Mettl is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Jack & Jill | Mercer | Mettl |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | IN |
| Founded | 2025 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · Mercer | Mettl 42
3.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · Mercer | Mettl 45
1.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · Mercer | Mettl 38
1.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Mercer | Mettl 38
1.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Mercer | Mettl 55
1.1 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Mercer | Mettl 52
0.3 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Mercer | Mettl.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Mercer | Mettl | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 38 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 42 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 38 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 42 (F) | +7 | +6.8 |
§ 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 | Jack & Jill | 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% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | 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 |
Jack & Jill 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 Jack & Jill 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 Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill 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