§ The result
Arctic Shores leads Adaface by 7 points.
Arctic Shores finishes 7 points ahead of Adaface under rubric v1.0, 46 to 39, both scored as Assessment entries. Arctic Shores leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Adaface leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Adaface 22, Arctic Shores 35) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Adaface 38, Arctic Shores 50), the second being 32% of the weighted advantage Arctic Shores holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Arctic Shores
Arctic Shores sells a task-based psychometric assessment platform ("Una") that scores candidates on behaviour captured during short interactive tasks - covering personality, workplace intelligence and learning agility - rather than self-report questionnaires or CV review.
§ The record
Adaface and Arctic Shores 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 | Arctic Shores |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Arctic Shores 50
2.4 weighted points to Arctic Shores
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Arctic Shores 35
2.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Arctic Shores 30
1.0 weighted points to Adaface
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Arctic Shores 35
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Arctic Shores 57
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Arctic Shores 56
0.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Arctic Shores 64
0.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Arctic Shores.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Arctic Shores | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 35 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 56 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 46 (F) | -7 | -6.5 |
§ 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 | Arctic Shores | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 6 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Arctic Shores 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