Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Mercer | Mettl vs Talogy
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
Mercer | Mettl and Talogy tie at 42.
Mercer | Mettl and Talogy tie at 42 under rubric v1.0 inside the Assessment cohort, arriving there from different criteria. Mercer | Mettl leads 4 of the 7 criteria and Talogy 3, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Mercer | Mettl 38, Talogy 53) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 69% of the weighted advantage Talogy holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Mercer | Mettl4
- Talogy3
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation38 vs 53
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Mercer | Mettl and Talogy are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Mercer | Mettl | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2010 | 1946 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight37% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl38Talogy533.0 weighted points to Talogy
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight64% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl42Talogy302.2 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight74% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl45Talogy520.8 weighted points to Talogy
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight83% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl38Talogy320.7 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight89% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl52Talogy580.5 weighted points to Talogy
- 6
FRIA Support
15% weight94% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl28Talogy250.4 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
- 7
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Mercer | Mettl55Talogy520.4 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.5.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Mercer | Mettl minus Talogy, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Mercer | Mettl | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 53 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 42F | 42F | - | -0.5 |
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 | Mercer | Mettl | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 22 | 9 | 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; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Mercer | Mettl last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy last reviewed
- August 2, 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.