§ The result
Test Partnership leads TalentLens on all 7 criteria.
Test Partnership holds a 4-point edge over TalentLens under rubric v1.0, 50 to 46, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Test Partnership is ahead of TalentLens on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at TalentLens 57 to Test Partnership 58. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (TalentLens 50, Test Partnership 57, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 26% of the weighted advantage Test Partnership holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
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
TalentLens 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 | TalentLens | Test Partnership |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
TalentLens 50 · Test Partnership 57
1.1 weighted points to Test Partnership
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
TalentLens 52 · Test Partnership 57
1.0 weighted points to Test Partnership
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
TalentLens 30 · Test Partnership 36
0.9 weighted points to Test Partnership
18% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
TalentLens 45 · Test Partnership 48
0.5 weighted points to Test Partnership
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
TalentLens 58 · Test Partnership 62
0.3 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
TalentLens 57 · Test Partnership 58
0.1 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
TalentLens 32 · Test Partnership 33
0.1 weighted points to Test Partnership
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -4.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is TalentLens minus Test Partnership.
| Category | Weight | TalentLens | Test Partnership | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 36 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 50 (F) | -4 | -4.1 |
§ 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 | TalentLens | Test Partnership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 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% | 4 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 5 | 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 |
TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 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 TalentLens and Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- TalentLens last reviewed
- September 25, 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