§ The result
Mercer | Mettl leads Moonhub by 12 points.
Mercer | Mettl sits 12 points above Moonhub under rubric v1.0 — 42 against 30 — with Mercer | Mettl filed under Assessment and Moonhub under Sourcing. Mercer | Mettl leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Moonhub leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Mercer | Mettl 42, Moonhub 18, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage Mercer | Mettl holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Mercer | Mettl is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Mercer | Mettl is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Mercer | Mettl | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2010 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Mercer | Mettl 42 · Moonhub 18
4.3 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
15% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Mercer | Mettl 55 · Moonhub 40
2.3 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Mercer | Mettl 38 · Moonhub 22
1.9 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Mercer | Mettl 38 · Moonhub 30
1.6 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Mercer | Mettl 52 · Moonhub 38
1.1 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Mercer | Mettl 28 · Moonhub 25
0.4 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Mercer | Mettl 45 · Moonhub 48
0.4 weighted points to Moonhub
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Mercer | Mettl minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Mercer | Mettl | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 18 | +24 | +4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 22 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 30 (F) | +12 | +11.3 |
§ 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 | Mercer | Mettl | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Mercer | Mettl has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 27 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Mercer | Mettl last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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