§ The result
1 point separates JazzHR and Wonderlic.
JazzHR (ATS-integrated) edges Wonderlic (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 44 to 43. JazzHR leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Wonderlic leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Wonderlic takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, JazzHR 35 to Wonderlic 48, 63% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Data Governance Disclosure, JazzHR 52 to Wonderlic 38.
Vendor profile
JazzHR
JazzHR is a small-business applicant tracking system that manages job posting, applications and hiring workflows, and layers on AI "Talent Fit" scoring that ranks candidates against a job description plus automated knockout screening questions.
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
JazzHR is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Wonderlic 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 Wonderlic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | JazzHR | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
JazzHR 35 · Wonderlic 48
2.3 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
JazzHR 52 · Wonderlic 38
2.1 weighted points to JazzHR
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
JazzHR 45 · Wonderlic 52
1.4 weighted points to Wonderlic
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
JazzHR 42 · Wonderlic 33
1.1 weighted points to JazzHR
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
JazzHR 58 · Wonderlic 52
0.7 weighted points to JazzHR
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
JazzHR 28 · Wonderlic 25
0.4 weighted points to JazzHR
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
JazzHR 56 · Wonderlic 55
0.1 weighted points to JazzHR
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is JazzHR minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | JazzHR | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 48 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 33 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 43 (F) | +1 | +0.7 |
§ 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 | JazzHR | 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% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 17 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
JazzHR has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 7 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 JazzHR sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for JazzHR, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- JazzHR last reviewed
- August 2, 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