eelloo, Assessio Bloom, Matrigma and Q1000: Which Test Have You Been Sent?

If you have been sent an assessment and the email says eelloo, Meurs HRM, Q1000, Assessio Bloom or Matrigma, all five of those point at one publisher, and only one of them is still that publisher's current name.

This matters more than a naming quirk usually would, for two reasons. The first is that most of the practice material online is filed under the dead names, so searching the name on your invitation and searching the name of the test you will sit produce different results. The second is that the score you get back will not be a percentile, and almost nobody explains what it is instead.

The lookup

The history, briefly, because the dates explain the confusion

Assessio International is a Swedish publisher based in Stockholm, and it has been buying Dutch companies. Meurs HRM, a Dutch assessment firm, renamed itself eelloo in September 2016. Assessio bought HFMtalentindex in 2019 and then eelloo in October 2021. In January 2024 eelloo renamed again, to Assessio Bloom, and said so plainly on its own site: since January we have changed our name, we are no longer called eelloo but Assessio Bloom. In July 2025 Assessio itself changed owner, from Main Capital to Pollen Street.

Three brand names in eight years, and none of the tests changed when the names did. A Dutch employer's careers page written in 2022 still says eelloo. Dutch prep sites still say eelloo, heavily, because that is what people search. So the word is dead and the traffic is not.

The scoring model nobody explains: the C-score

Assessio does not hand you a percentile. It hands you a C-score, an integer from 0 to 10. Both Matrigma technical manuals define it the same way: a mean of 5 and a standard deviation of 2. So 5 is the middle of the population and roughly two thirds of people land between 3 and 7.

The band labels differ between the two versions of Matrigma, which is a genuine product difference rather than a source conflict, and it is the thing most likely to make you misread your own result:

If you see general reference material saying the C-scale has a midpoint of 5.5, that is the textbook definition of the scale rather than Assessio's. For anything Assessio, Assessio's own definition governs: mean 5.

Matrigma: two versions, and they reward opposite things

Both versions show the same thing: a 3x3 grid of simple figures with the bottom right cell missing, and six options of which exactly one is correct. What differs is the clock.

The adaptive version runs two clocks at once, and that is its defining feature. Twelve minutes overall, and a separate sixty seconds on every single item. Spend the full minute on each and you see exactly twelve items. The maximum pool is forty, which Assessio itself calls extremely unlikely to be reached. Difficulty follows your answers, so finishing around half right is the designed outcome for almost everyone and says nothing about how you did.

The classic version is thirty-five items in one forty-minute sitting with no per-item clock at all. That is about sixty-eight seconds an item, and Assessio describes it as a fairly generous allowance. On this version the constraint is the difficulty curve, not the clock, so rushing buys you nothing. One quirk worth knowing: only thirty of the thirty-five items are scored, and you are not told which five. An item that looks unlike everything around it may simply not count.

Q1000 Capaciteiten: a clock on every single question

This is the test a candidate invited by Assessio Bloom will most likely face, and its pacing model is unlike anything else you will meet. It is a battery of four to seven subtests depending on level, run back to back, and every individual question has its own time limit shown as a progress bar at the top. The academic-level form has four subtests:

Four rules follow from that structure, and all four are the vendor's, not ours:

• Time cannot be banked. Unused seconds do not transfer to the next question. An item you cannot crack inside its own window has to be guessed and abandoned.
• Each answer is final once you proceed. There is no back button and no review pass, so there is nothing to save time for.
• A blank counts as wrong and nothing is deducted for a guess. Guessing therefore strictly dominates leaving an item empty. There is never a reason to leave one.
• Only the number of correct answers counts. Speed earns nothing here either.

Two details worth knowing before you sit it. Cijferreeksen asks for the last two numbers of the series, not one, which surprises people who have done number series before. And there is no calculator. Diagrammen at twenty-five seconds is the tightest budget in the battery and is where pacing discipline is decided.

MAP and Match-V: the two you cannot win

MAP is Assessio's Five Factor personality questionnaire: 200 statements, untimed, reported across five factors and twenty-five facets. Assessio says there is no such thing as the right personality and no advantage in being dishonest, and unusually, the product backs that up rather than merely asserting it.

Assessio derives a second report from the same administration called MAP-X, built on what it calls the Extremes Model. It holds that dispositions at the extremes of the Five Factor Model are likely to be maladaptive, and names ten poles in five pairs: Withdrawn and Attention Seeking, Insensitive and Overcaring, Impulsive and Rigid, Emotional and Unresponsive, Conformist and Eccentric. Both ends are flagged, not just the low one. Its published scoring documentation bands each competency as Risk of underusing, Just right, or Risk of overdoing, with an ideal range around the 65th to 90th percentile rather than the top.

In other words there is no direction to push a profile in that is safe. A candidate engineering maximum conscientiousness lands in the band labelled Rigid.

Match-V is the values instrument: 85 items, about ten to fifteen minutes, placing you on nine Schwartz values in four domains that oppose each other in pairs. Your result is compared against an employer's own culture profile, so there is no good set of values in the abstract, and a weak match at one employer says nothing about your fit anywhere else.

Where you will meet this, and where you will not

Sweden and the Nordics first, by origin. The Netherlands second and substantially, by acquisition: Assessio Bloom reports 1,800 Dutch clients and 1.4 million tests administered in 2022 on the Dutch side alone.

We could not evidence meaningful UK or US prevalence, and Matrigma is positioned as the cognitive option outside the United States rather than inside it. If you are applying in the UK or the US and the invitation does not name one of the products above, it is more likely to be SHL, Aon or Criteria. Our provider lookup guide turns a product name into a vendor.

The pipeline stage is unusual in that it sits at both ends. Transdev used Assessio in the first step to screen every applicant for driver roles. EIT InnoEnergy uses it at shortlist, with seven or eight candidates left. So you may meet it immediately after applying or just before final interviews, and the invitation rarely tells you which.

You can practise all five formats, with the real clocks and the real scoring vocabulary, at our Assessio hub.