§ The result
TalentLens leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under Assessment, TalentLens and Turing come out 46 and 36 under rubric v1.0, 10 points in favour of TalentLens. TalentLens is ahead of Turing on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being FRIA Support at TalentLens 30 to Turing 25. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (TalentLens 45, Turing 28, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 32% of the weighted advantage TalentLens 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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
TalentLens and Turing are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | TalentLens | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
TalentLens 45 · Turing 28
3.1 weighted points to TalentLens
20% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
TalentLens 52 · Turing 42
2.0 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
TalentLens 57 · Turing 45
1.4 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
TalentLens 50 · Turing 44
0.9 weighted points to TalentLens
8% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
TalentLens 58 · Turing 48
0.8 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
TalentLens 30 · Turing 25
0.8 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
TalentLens 32 · Turing 27
0.6 weighted points to TalentLens
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is TalentLens minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | TalentLens | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 28 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 44 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 45 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 27 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 36 (F) | +10 | +9.6 |
§ 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 | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- TalentLens last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 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