§ The result
Versant by Pearson leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under Assessment, Versant by Pearson and Turing come out 49 and 36 under rubric v1.0, 13 points in favour of Versant by Pearson. Versant by Pearson takes all 7 criteria and Turing none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Turing 25 to Versant by Pearson 30. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Turing 42, Versant by Pearson 63, 20% weight), is only 32% of the weighted advantage Versant by Pearson builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Versant by Pearson
Versant by Pearson is a suite of AI-scored English proficiency tests (plus spoken Spanish, French, Arabic and Dutch) that automatically score candidates' spoken and written responses on Pearson's Global Scale of English within minutes, used by employers such as contact centres and BPOs to screen applicants and benchmark staff through the ScoreKeeper dashboard.
§ The record
Turing and Versant by Pearson are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Turing | Versant by Pearson |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 1844 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Turing 42 · Versant by Pearson 63
4.2 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Turing 28 · Versant by Pearson 42
2.5 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Turing 27 · Versant by Pearson 43
1.9 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Turing 44 · Versant by Pearson 53
1.3 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Turing 45 · Versant by Pearson 56
1.3 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Turing 48 · Versant by Pearson 61
1.0 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Turing 25 · Versant by Pearson 30
0.8 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -13.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Turing minus Versant by Pearson.
| Category | Weight | Turing | Versant by Pearson | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 63 | -21 | -4.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 42 | -14 | -2.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 53 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 56 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 27 | 43 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 61 | -13 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 36 (F) | 49 (F) | -13 | -13.1 |
§ 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 | Turing | Versant by Pearson | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Versant by Pearson has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Versant by Pearson 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: 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for Versant by Pearson, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Versant by Pearson 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