§ The result
Sapia.ai leads Test Partnership by 6 points.
Sapia.ai scores 56 and Test Partnership 50 under rubric v1.0 — a 6-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Sapia.ai, with 1 level: Sapia.ai is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Test Partnership on FRIA Support. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Sapia.ai 50, Test Partnership 33) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Sapia.ai 70, Test Partnership 57), the second being 39% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
Vendor profile
Test Partnership
Test Partnership publishes computer-adaptive aptitude tests, the TPAQ personality questionnaire and MindmetriQ game-based cognitive assessments. Employers review, rank and export the resulting norm-referenced percentile and sten scores in its dashboard, through its API or in integrated ATSs.
§ The record
Sapia.ai and Test Partnership are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Sapia.ai | Test Partnership |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | GB |
| Founded | 2013 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sapia.ai 70 · Test Partnership 57
2.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sapia.ai 50 · Test Partnership 33
2.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sapia.ai 62 · Test Partnership 57
0.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
18% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sapia.ai 52 · Test Partnership 48
0.7 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sapia.ai 62 · Test Partnership 58
0.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sapia.ai 35 · Test Partnership 36
0.1 weighted points to Test Partnership
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sapia.ai minus Test Partnership.
| Category | Weight | Sapia.ai | Test Partnership | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 57 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 48 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 36 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 57 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 33 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 50 (F) | +6 | +6.4 |
§ 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 | Sapia.ai | Test Partnership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Test Partnership has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sapia.ai and Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sapia.ai last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Test Partnership last reviewed
- September 25, 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