119 Tools, One Market: What Online Assessments Have in Common and What Sets Them Apart
The shortest online assessment takes two minutes, the longest two hours. One administration costs between €3.50 and €5,900. Anyone looking for the right instrument in this market first needs a clear question.
- 119 Tools, One Market: What Online Assessments Have in Common and What Sets Them Apart
- Two minutes or two hours
- Why the choice of instrument matters more than it used to
- What the tools measure
- How the tools are built
- What an instrument costs, in time and money
- What almost all have in common
- Which problems the tools solve
- First the question, then the tool
Two minutes or two hours
For this article, I analyzed 119 active online assessment tools from 43 providers, feature by feature. The range is enormous. Aivy's game-based assessments are completed in two to three minutes, while Korn Ferry's KF4D leadership assessment takes up to two hours. The price per administration ranges from €3.50 at high volumes to €5,900 for an instrument with a full interview.
Both belong to the same product category. And both say something about people, though about very different things. The 119 tools measure different characteristics, in different ways and under different conditions. Those who know this choose differently.
Why the choice of instrument matters more than it used to
The written application is losing its informative value. In a 2025 Greenhouse survey of more than 4,000 respondents, 91 percent of recruiting leaders report observed or suspected AI-assisted deception. According to Gartner, 39 percent of 3,290 surveyed candidates have already used AI in the application process, and Gartner predicts that by 2028 one in four candidate profiles could be fake.
As CVs look more and more alike, the question of how else people can be reliably distinguished moves to the foreground. Research gives a nuanced answer. The meta-analysis by Sackett, Zhang, Berry and Lievens (2022) puts the predictive validity for job performance at .42 for structured interviews, .40 for job knowledge tests, .33 for work samples and .31 for cognitive ability tests. Instruments therefore differ considerably in what they deliver. Choosing a tool is a decision with consequences.
What the tools measure
Roughly one in three tools on the market measures personality or behavioral style, 43 of 119 in total, including OPQ32 by SHL, HPI by Hogan, MAP by Assessio and PPA by Thomas International. Cognitive abilities are assessed by 26 tools, such as Raven's Progressive Matrices by Pearson TalentLens, Verify G+ by SHL or Matrigma by Assessio. Just as many, namely 26, measure leadership behavior and competencies, for example CAPTain by CNT, the Leadership Circle Profile or XLNC_s by XLNC. Motives, values and interests are the focus of 16 tools, including MVPI by Hogan, the Reiss Motivation Profile by IDS and AKF by Ixly.
The specialist areas are smaller. Ten tools diagnose team, culture or climate, such as the Organizational Culture Inventory by Human Synergistics or the Lencioni Team Assessment by The Table Group. Seven tools each measure emotional intelligence, like EQ-i 2.0 by MHS, or judgment in work situations. Six tools focus on risks, derailers and integrity, including HDS by Hogan as well as IBES and INWORK by Hogrefe. 18 tools cover several of these areas at once.
19 tools, one in six, include the assessment of others, as 360-degree feedback or external perception. 15 of them are leadership tools. Leadership is thus often measured through how others perceive it, while the other areas rely almost entirely on self-report.
How the tools are built
Rating scales are the most common format. 54 tools (45 percent) have statements rated on a Likert scale. 18 tools use forced choice, where respondents choose between several statements and the result shows the weighting within one person. Well-known examples are OPQ32 by SHL, ADEPT-15 by Aon and PPA by Thomas International. 24 tools are ability tests with right and wrong answers, eleven work with scenarios, so-called situational judgment tests. Among the personality tools there are two camps: 28 ask with a rating scale, 14 have respondents choose between statements.
Two thirds of the tools are norm-referenced, meaning a person's result is compared with a reference group. 77 tools do this; among the tools that state their scoring logic, it is 94 percent. Nine tools combine the norm comparison with a check against criteria, including Watson-Glaser by Pearson TalentLens and the Caliper Profile by Talogy. Only a single tool is purely criterion-referenced, CAPTain by CNT. It measures behavior against the requirement profile of the role, without a reference group.
Type tests are well known and part of the market, but in our database they are the exception in numbers. The reason is often the lack of scientific evidence for their predictive validity. We have included only two of the many type-based tools, and these sort people into types, the MBTI by The Myers-Briggs Company and CORE Potential by Human Edge with its archetypes. All others work with scales, dimensions or scores.
New technology is rarer than the debate suggests. Six tools adapt their questions to previous answers, such as Verify G+ by SHL and ADEPT-15 by Aon. Another six tools, around five percent, use artificial intelligence for scoring, including ChatAssess by Aon and several instruments by Zortify. All four game-based tools come from Aivy.
What an instrument costs, in time and money
The median administration time is 22.5 minutes. 14 tools are done in ten minutes or less, six take an hour or longer.
Languages also vary widely. 25 tools are available in 40 or more languages, and all five tools with more than 50 languages come from Thomas International. Six tools exist only in German, four from alpha-test and two from Hogrefe.
Price deserves a second look. Concrete prices are available for 72 tools. The test price alone falls short, because feedback sessions cost between €50 and €360 per hour. For some tools, one hour of feedback costs more than the test itself. Volume discounts are also considerable, at high volumes the price per test drops by 45 to 82 percent.
On top of that come fixed costs. 32 tools may only be used with certification. Costs range from €600 at Ixly to €4,900 for Profile XT by Profiles International, including 15 licenses. A certification for €2,400 means an extra €240 per person with ten candidates, and €24 with 100 candidates. And it only applies to the provider where it was obtained.
What almost all have in common
For all their diversity, the tools share a basic pattern. 84 of 119 are self-assessment questionnaires. The vast majority compare against a norm and deliver a profile as the result, among the tools with information on output it is 79 percent. And almost all run digitally via a portal or platform. The only non-automated instrument is SmartAssessment by ghSmart, a biographical interview lasting several hours.
The data behind the instruments is documented too. For 49 tools a norm sample with a stated size is available, 39 of them comprise 1,000 people or more, and the median is 3,916. The largest documented samples belong to ADEPT-15 by Aon with 254,307 people and HPI, HDS and MVPI by Hogan with 159,440. Reliability figures are documented for 46 tools, validity studies for 29.
The market itself is fragmented. 21 of the 43 providers have exactly one tool, while the five largest portfolios from Human Edge, Aon, Aivy, Hogan and Ixly together account for 38 tools. The oldest providers are Gallup (1935), Talogy (1946) and Hogrefe (1949), the youngest Aivy and Zortify, both founded in 2018.
Seven findings that surpriseTwo minutes or two hours. Aivy's games take two to three minutes, Korn Ferry's KF4D up to two hours.
€3.50 or €5,900 is what one administration costs, depending on tool and scope.
Types are the exception. Only 2 of 119 tools work with types.
AI is still rare. Six tools use artificial intelligence for scoring.
One tool without a reference group. Only CAPTain scores purely against the requirement profile, 77 tools compare with a norm.
One in six tools asks others. 19 tools include external perception.
Norm samples from 115 to 254,307 people range from CORE Energy (Human Edge) to ADEPT-15 (Aon).
Which problems the tools solve
It almost always starts with a concrete problem. A leadership team works against each other. A key position has to be filled externally, and nobody knows the candidates. After a merger, it is unclear who takes on which role. A company does not know who is ready for the next leadership level.
For our analysis we distinguished 29 such decision situations in five fields. 14 concern leadership, from selecting a CEO through crisis leadership and leadership in restructuring to early warning signs of leadership failure. Seven concern potential, such as succession planning, career paths or the question of who can learn to lead. Four concern teams, from team climate to conflicts and role clarity. Two concern apprentices and trainees, two more retention risk and entrepreneurial thinking.
HR leaders, managers, coaches and consultants face these questions alike. The tools differ in how broadly they can be used. 72 of the 119 tools are assigned to at least one of these situations. Some cover up to nine, 17 specialize in exactly one.
First the question, then the tool
These figures lead to a simple order. First define what the role or the development requires, then choose the instrument that measures exactly that. Five questions help. Which decision should the result support, a selection or a development? Which characteristic is relevant for it, personality, behavior, ability or motivation? Is self-report enough, or does it take the judgment of others? Should the result be compared with a reference group or measured against a requirement profile? And what does the instrument cost in total, with test, feedback and certification, in the languages actually needed?
Anyone who has answered these questions will find the right one in a market of 119 tools.
Data basis: PEATS database, 119 active tools from 43 providers, as of October 9, 2026.