§ The result
Wonderlic takes the total, Recruitee takes more of the criteria.
Wonderlic (Assessment) edges Recruitee (ATS-integrated) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 43 to 42. Recruitee leads more of the criteria than Wonderlic — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Wonderlic leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Wonderlic. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Recruitee 30, Wonderlic 48 — and at an 18% weight it carries 62% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Recruitee
Collaborative applicant tracking system, part of the Tellent group, with AI-assisted features for job-description generation, screening candidates against team-defined criteria, resurfacing past applicants, and summarizing evaluation feedback.
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
Recruitee 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 | Recruitee | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | NL | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Recruitee 30 · Wonderlic 48
3.2 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Recruitee 52 · Wonderlic 38
2.1 weighted points to Recruitee
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Recruitee 42 · Wonderlic 52
2.0 weighted points to Wonderlic
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Recruitee 40 · Wonderlic 33
0.8 weighted points to Recruitee
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Recruitee 58 · Wonderlic 52
0.7 weighted points to Recruitee
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Recruitee 27 · Wonderlic 25
0.3 weighted points to Recruitee
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Recruitee 58 · Wonderlic 55
0.2 weighted points to Recruitee
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.4 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 -1.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Recruitee minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Recruitee | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 27 | 25 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 43 (F) | -1 | -1.0 |
§ 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 | Recruitee | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 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 domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Recruitee has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 21 for Recruitee, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Recruitee last reviewed
- July 17, 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