§ The result
3 points separate TalentLens and Wonderlic.
TalentLens holds a 3-point edge over Wonderlic under rubric v1.0, 46 to 43, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. TalentLens leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Wonderlic leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. One criterion, Data Governance Disclosure, is both the widest raw gap (TalentLens 50, Wonderlic 38) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 15% weight it makes up 53% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
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
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
TalentLens and Wonderlic 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 | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | Not recorded | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
TalentLens 50 · Wonderlic 38
1.8 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
TalentLens 30 · Wonderlic 25
0.8 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
TalentLens 57 · Wonderlic 52
0.6 weighted points to TalentLens
18% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
TalentLens 45 · Wonderlic 48
0.5 weighted points to Wonderlic
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
TalentLens 58 · Wonderlic 55
0.2 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
TalentLens 32 · Wonderlic 33
0.1 weighted points to Wonderlic
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is TalentLens minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | TalentLens | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 43 (F) | +3 | +2.7 |
§ 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 | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 9 | 6 | 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; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 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 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- TalentLens last reviewed
- September 25, 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