Every category where a model named Mercer | Mettl for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Candidate assessment	Talent acquisition	0%	16 of 101	0%	7	under 10 labels · led by TestGorilla at 68%
Technical hiring assessments	Talent acquisition	0%	22 of 52	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by HackerRank at 28%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Mercer | Mettl yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Mercer | Mettl across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	2	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct5 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labels1

Comparative30 labels3not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative45 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 4 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“globally recognized enterprise-grade assessment platform widely adopted for hiring, certification, and compliance” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“Choose Mercer Mettl/Testlify if: You are a large enterprise needing robust compliance” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Candidate assessment · comparative prompt · alternative

“Enterprise psychometrics, high-volume ... Cons: Expensive, less SMB-friendly” Grok 4.1 Fast · Candidate assessment · comparative prompt · alternative

“Mercer Mettl – worldwide delivery, many languages, robust analytics.” MiniMax M2.5 · Candidate assessment · comparative prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Mercer | Mettl, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Mercer | Mettl was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HackerRank35 of 459Not in the top three

Codility35 of 455Not in the top three

TestGorilla31 of 452Not in the top three

Criteria Corp24 of 451Not in the top three

SHL19 of 457Not in the top three

iMocha19 of 452Not in the top three

CodeSignal18 of 451Not in the top three

CoderPad15 of 451Not in the top three

HireVue13 of 450Not in the top three

Testlify10 of 451Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Mercer | Mettl. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 42 of the 45 answers that named Mercer | Mettl and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

testlify.com28

worldmetrics.org14

bestrecruitingtools.com13

g2.com13

testgorilla.com13

bryq.com12

codility.com12

gartner.com11

hackerrank.com11

wifitalents.com11

138 of the 138 domain citations in answers naming Mercer | Mettl came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

testlify.com/top-10-pre-hire-assessment-platforms-for-enterprises16

testlify.com/guide-to-choose-the-best-talent-assessment-software15

bestrecruitingtools.com/blog/best-pre-employment-assessment-software-enterprise-202612

bryq.com/blog/best-talent-assessment-platforms-202611

worldmetrics.org/best/online-assessment-software11

codility.com/how-to-choose-technical-assessment-platform9

fuel50.com/blog/skills-assessment-platforms9

gartner.com/reviews/market/talent-assessment-software9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Mercer | Mettl

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Mercer | Mettl; a claim can dispute any of them.

Mercer Mettl 4Mettl 1

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Mercer | Mettl's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Mercer | Mettl, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at mercer.io is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.