§ The result
Alva Labs leads Adaface on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Alva Labs opens a 22-point lead on Adaface, 61 (D) to 39 (F), with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Alva Labs takes all 7 criteria and Adaface none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Adaface 30 to Alva Labs 38. The advantage Alva Labs holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Adaface 38, Alva Labs 78, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 36% of the weighted points Alva Labs gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Adaface
Adaface runs chatbot-led 'conversational' skills tests for 500+ roles that score candidates automatically as pass, borderline pass or fail on benchmarked scorecards, backed by webcam, screen and IP proctoring and an AI résumé parser.
Vendor profile
Alva Labs
Alva Labs sells a science-backed hiring platform whose core is a suite of proprietary psychometric assessments - an adaptive logic (general mental ability) test, a Five-Factor Model personality test, and coding tests - wrapped in candidate management, CV screening, and structured-interview tooling.
§ The record
Adaface and Alva Labs are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Adaface | Alva Labs |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | SE |
| Founded | 2018 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Alva Labs 78
8.0 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Alva Labs 58
6.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Alva Labs 68
2.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Alva Labs 52
1.7 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Alva Labs 63
1.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Alva Labs 38
1.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Alva Labs 68
0.8 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -22.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -22 beside that -22.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Alva Labs.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Alva Labs | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 78 | -40 | -8.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 58 | -36 | -6.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 68 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 63 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 68 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 61 (D) | -22 | -22.1 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Adaface | Alva Labs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Alva Labs has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next