Sova is a well-regarded UK assessment platform, with mobile-first assessments, a good candidate experience and a strong set of enterprise integrations. For large organisations that want a broad platform with substantial implementation support, it's a credible choice.
But an enterprise-style solution isn't right for everyone. For many mid-market employers, it can bring more cost, more onboarding effort and more complexity than they actually need. And there's another reason that's becoming more pressing than the rest... AI.
In high-volume and graduate hiring, where Sova is most used, even a small share of candidates using AI can push honest test takers down the rankings. You may notice it from average scores creeping up year after year. So as well as the usual comparisons, let's look at how each alternative handles AI, which is fast becoming one of the most important questions in modern hiring.
Thomas International
Thomas International is an established UK psychometrics provider. Reviewers praise its reports and describe them as detailed, visually appealing and full of practical guidance, which makes them useful for both hiring decisions and development conversations. It's rated 4.7 out of 5 on Capterra, with customer service also scoring 4.7.
On AI, Thomas is a decent option. Its aptitude test, the GIA, is built from quick-fire sections with well over 100 short questions in around 20 minutes of timed testing, and that speed gives it some built-in resilience compared with a traditional reasoning test, as there's very little time to consult an AI tool. It isn't AI-proof, but it's a stronger starting point than most. A good fit if report quality, a hands-on account relationship and some protection against AI matter to you.
Clevry
Clevry is a UK provider of ability tests, personality questionnaires and situational judgement tests, and a more accessible option than an enterprise platform licence. Its prices are published on its website, its subscription plans include unlimited candidates and custom assessments, and there's a pay-as-you-go option for teams that hire less often. Reviewers on G2 most often praise its ease of use and reports that managers find clear and easy to act on.
Comparing candidates side by side can take effort, and like Thomas, AI resistance isn't a headline feature, so it's worth asking directly. A good fit if you want simplicity and predictable costs.
Test Partnership
Test Partnership takes AI resistance seriously, with two levels of protection to choose from. Our Signals series keeps a familiar reasoning-test format but builds in AI resilience by having short questions one at a time, each with its own short timer, leaving very little time to consult an AI tool. It's available for numerical reasoning and critical thinking, and while no online test is completely AI-proof, it gives you considerably more protection than a traditional test.
For the strongest protection, MindmetriQ, our gamified cognitive assessments, is designed so that AI can't assist at all: the reasoning happens through interacting with game-based tasks, rather than reading a question and choosing an answer, so there's nothing to hand over to an AI tool. Rather than catching cheats after the fact, both are designed to limit the opportunity in the first place, so your scores stay meaningful as AI use grows, and MindmetriQ takes just 4 to 6 minutes on mobile, which suits high-volume campaigns.
Results are flexible too. Candidate results can be viewed and compared in the platform, integrated with your ATS, downloaded as detailed PDF reports, or exported to CSV for your own analysis.
It helped us massively during the hiring process as this is a very comparable test so we were able to directly analyse candidates. It also saved us time, as we were able to rule out some candidates based on scores, saving us interview time. One of my favourite things about Test Partnership is the user interface. I believe it is very simple to use. Furthermore, the use of graphs and other data makes it easy to compare.
And it's all lower friction than an enterprise platform. You can be up and running quickly, without a lengthy or resource-heavy implementation, with training and onboarding included and our team on hand to help. Pricing is tailored to your annual volume and the features you actually use, with unlimited users included, so you get robust cognitive and behavioural insight without paying for enterprise overhead.
Conclusion and next steps
If you're looking for a Sova alternative, the choice comes down to what matters most to you.
If report quality and a close account relationship are the priority, Thomas International is a strong choice, and its speed-based GIA gives you some protection against AI. If you want simplicity and predictable costs, Clevry's published pricing makes it easy to budget for. If you want high-quality assessment with faster adoption and less enterprise overhead, Test Partnership is built for exactly that. And if AI-assisted candidates and rising scores are the concern, as they are for more and more graduate recruiters, our MindmetriQ assessments are built to prevent AI use rather than try to catch it.
You can demo MindmetriQ, explore our aptitude tests and ATS integrations, or see what's included on our pricing page.
Sources: Sova, Sova on G2, Thomas International, Thomas on Capterra, Clevry pricing, Clevry on G2.
Joshua Hancock
Digital Marketing Manager at Test Partnership. Over seven years' experience as a writer, content strategist, SEO and digital marketer.
