§ The result
Bryq leads Alooba by 19 points.
Bryq finishes 19 points clear of Alooba inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 57 against 38. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Bryq: Bryq is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Alooba on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 22, Bryq 70 — and at an 18% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Bryq holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Alooba
Alooba sells online skills assessments (auto-graded SQL, Python/R, multiple-choice and data-analysis tests, plus manually graded free-response and one-way video questions) that employers use to screen, benchmark and optionally auto-reject job candidates.
Vendor profile
Bryq
Bryq is a science-based talent-intelligence platform whose core product is a short, blind, chatbot-driven pre-hire assessment scoring candidates on cognitive ability, personality/behavioral traits, and job skills to produce a job-fit "match" score used for hiring and internal mobility.
§ The record
Alooba and Bryq 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 | Alooba | Bryq |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Bryq 70
8.6 weighted points to Bryq
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Bryq 54
2.8 weighted points to Bryq
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Bryq 62
2.5 weighted points to Bryq
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Bryq 55
2.3 weighted points to Bryq
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Bryq 40
1.8 weighted points to Bryq
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Bryq 66
0.6 weighted points to Bryq
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Bryq 54
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -18.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -18.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Bryq.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Bryq | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 54 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 70 | -48 | -8.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 62 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 55 | -19 | -2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 57 (F) | -19 | -18.6 |
§ 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 | Alooba | Bryq | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | 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 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 20 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Bryq has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Bryq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 24 for Bryq, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Bryq last reviewed
- July 17, 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