Mercer | Mettl

Mercer | Mettl is an online talent assessment and remote-proctoring platform offering psychometric, aptitude, coding, and skills tests plus AI-assisted exam proctoring and scoring for hiring, certification, and L&D.
AssessmentVideo interviewScreening

HireAIScore rates Mercer | Mettl 42 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed June 7, 2026. Mercer | Mettl ranks 59 of 82 vendors rated in Assessment AI, against a category average of 46. That score is drawn from 14 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for Mercer | Mettl — 9 with a cited source, 5 recording that nothing was located.

Score breakdown

Mercer | Mettl, criterion by criterion

Each rubric criterion is scored out of 100 on the cited evidence, then weighted into the total.

Weighted contribution shown to the right of each bar.

  1. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Weight 20% · avg 50

    38

    +7.6

  2. Bias Audit Transparency

    Weight 18% · avg 41

    42

    +7.6

  3. FRIA Support

    Weight 15% · avg 31

    28

    +4.2

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    Weight 15% · avg 53

    55

    +8.3

  5. Human Oversight Design

    Weight 12% · avg 55

    45

    +5.4

  6. Post-Market Monitoring

    Weight 12% · avg 38

    38

    +4.6

  7. Customer Documentation

    Weight 8% · avg 58

    52

    +4.2

Total weighted score

41.7(rounded to 42 for display)

Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 82 Assessment AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.

Strongest criterion

Data Governance Disclosure

55raw / 100

Contributes 8.3 to the total. 55 against a 53 category average.

Weakest criterion

FRIA Support

28raw / 100

Contributes 4.2 to the total. 28 against a 31 category average.

Cited evidence

The evidence behind the score

Every score is backed by at least one cited piece of evidence. Open a criterion to see what was found, when, and where.

Download diligence record

Evidence ledger

Items
14
Documentation
7
Public statement
2
Absence
5
With a source URL
9 of 14
Source hostnames
3
Fewest items
1
Bias Audit Transparency

These figures measure how thoroughly Mercer | Mettl was reviewed, not how Mercer | Mettl performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.

Article 11 Technical Documentation

3 items38
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Blog/methodology page states Mettl assessments adhere to SIOP and EEOC personnel-selection guidelines and reports validity (convergent) of 0.4-0.67 and reliability of 0.63-0.73, but offers no AI model card or explainability documentation.

    https://blog.mettl.com/psychometric-property-reliability-validity/

  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Security-features page lists ISO 27001:2013, ISO 9001:2015, SOC 2 Type 2 and GDPR but contains no AI-specific technical documentation or ISO 42001.

    https://mettl.com/en/information-security-features/

  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No model card, system card, or AI explainability statement for the proctoring/scoring algorithms was found on mettl.com product, security, or blog pages.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Bias Audit Transparency

1 item42
  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No independent NYC LL 144 bias audit (auditor, date, impact ratios) was found on mettl.com or in the ACLU LL144 audit tracker; only internal adverse-impact assertions exist.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

FRIA Support

2 items28

Data Governance Disclosure

2 items55
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Security page details AWS hosting with localized servers in Europe/China/India, 256-bit SSL/TLS encryption, least-privilege access, MFA (RFC 6238), annual penetration testing, and a 'never barter or sell information' commitment.

    https://mettl.com/en/information-security-features/

  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Information-security client page states clients can request deletion of all data after contract termination/expiry and describes annual third-party penetration and vulnerability testing plus daily WhiteHat scanning.

    https://mettl.com/clients/information-security/

Human Oversight Design

2 items45
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Proctoring page describes an AI-based proctoring suite (SecureProctor, Mettl Secure Browser) but provides no detail on human-in-the-loop review, override controls, or explainability of AI flags.

    https://mettl.com/en/online-remote-proctoring/

  • Public statementCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Mettl positions itself as a data processor acting on client (controller) instructions, implying human/client control over decisions, but without documented in-product oversight or override mechanisms.

    https://mettl.com/en/information-security-features/

Post-Market Monitoring

2 items38
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Page describes a robust incident-management program, annual third-party penetration/vulnerability testing, and daily WhiteHat scanning, and provides a privacy contact email (mettl_privacy_mettl@mercer.com) but no public status page or vulnerability-disclosure program.

    https://mettl.com/clients/information-security/

  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No public status/uptime page, model-update changelog, or dedicated security.txt/vulnerability-disclosure channel was found for Mercer | Mettl.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Customer Documentation

2 items52

Editorial notes

Company overview

Mercer | Mettl is an online assessment and remote-proctoring platform founded in 2010 by Ketan Kapoor and Tonmoy Shingal in Gurgaon, India, and acquired by Mercer (part of Marsh McLennan) in October 2018. It provides a large library of psychometric, aptitude, coding, and behavioral assessments, structured and video interviews, and an AI-assisted proctoring suite (SecureProctor, Mettl Secure Browser) that uses webcam, audio, and screen monitoring to flag suspicious activity. The platform serves roughly 2,000 enterprise clients across 80+ countries for hiring, certification, and learning and development.

Regulatory exposure

As an assessment and AI-proctoring vendor scoring and screening candidates, Mercer | Mettl supplies tools that are likely high-risk AEDTs under NYC Local Law 144 and high-risk AI under the EU AI Act, and are in scope for Illinois and Colorado AI-hiring rules. The company publishes a solid information-security and GDPR posture (ISO 27001:2013, ISO 9001:2015, SOC 2 Type 2) and self-reported psychometric fairness claims (adverse-impact testing by age/gender/ethnicity, SIOP/EEOC/APA alignment), but no independent, downloadable NYC LL 144 bias audit, no ISO 42001 AI management certification, no FRIA or Art. 27 deployer guidance, and only general parent-company EU AI Act thought leadership rather than product-specific compliance documentation. Deployers therefore carry most of the public-disclosure and audit burden.

Path to a higher score

Mercer | Mettl could materially raise its score by commissioning and publicly posting an independent, downloadable NYC LL 144-style bias audit (auditor, date, intersectional impact ratios) and renewing it annually; publishing a model/system card or technical pack with an explainability statement for its proctoring and scoring AI; pursuing ISO 42001; releasing explicit EU AI Act deployer guidance and a FRIA template; documenting in-product human-oversight, override, and audit-log controls; and standing up a public status page and security/vulnerability-disclosure channel.

Regulatory frame

What applies to assessment AI.

Assessment is the most-regulated surface in AI hiring. NYC LL 144, EEOC and OFCCP frameworks, Illinois HB 3773, and EU AI Act Annex III §4 all apply, with overlap on bias-audit obligations.

Keep reading

All assessment vendorsHow this score is builtAnnex IV section-by-section: what AI hiring vendors must documentWhat makes a defensible NYC LL 144 bias audit

Compare

Mercer | Mettl against its nearest-scoring peers.

The closest scores in Assessment AI, side by side.

Build any comparison

Ranking

Others rated in Assessment AI

Ranked 59 of 82 by weighted total under rubric v1.0. The ordering is arithmetic on the rubric and carries no view on which tool suits a given hiring process.

  1. #56Coderbyte42F
  2. #57Talogy42F
  3. #58Tengai42F
  4. #59Mercer | MettlThis profile42F
  5. #60Zoho Recruit42F
  6. #61CoderPad42F
All assessment vendors

Conflicts of interest

No vendor pays for placement, scoring, or removal. Casework - the consulting firm that operates this directory - provides paid services to some vendors. Any active or recent (within 24 months) commercial relationship is disclosed on the affected vendor profile and the review is reassigned to an independent reviewer. See the full policy on About.

Casework has no commercial relationship with this vendor.