§ The result
Sense leads Wonderlic on all 7 criteria.
Sense finishes 15 points clear of Wonderlic under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 43 — across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Sense leads every one of the 7 criteria, Wonderlic none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Sense 62 to Wonderlic 55. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Sense 72, Wonderlic 48, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage Sense holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
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
Sense is filed under Screening AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | Sense | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sense 72 · Wonderlic 48
4.3 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sense 58 · Wonderlic 38
3.0 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sense 52 · Wonderlic 33
2.3 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sense 38 · Wonderlic 25
1.9 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sense 60 · Wonderlic 52
1.6 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sense 64 · Wonderlic 52
1.4 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sense 62 · Wonderlic 55
0.6 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +15.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sense minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Sense | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 72 | 48 | +24 | +4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 25 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 38 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 52 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 33 | +19 | +2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 43 (F) | +15 | +15.2 |
§ 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 | Sense | 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% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 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 Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sense last reviewed
- June 7, 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