§ The result
3 points separate Alooba and Ceipal.
Alooba holds a 3-point edge over Ceipal under rubric v1.0, 38 to 35, across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Alooba leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Ceipal leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 40, Ceipal 30 — and at a 20% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Alooba holds across the 5 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
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Ceipal under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Alooba is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | Ceipal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Ceipal 30
2.0 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Ceipal 46
1.1 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Ceipal 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Ceipal 53
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Ceipal 20
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Ceipal 38
0.2 weighted points to Ceipal
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Ceipal 46
0.1 weighted points to Ceipal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +3.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Ceipal.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Ceipal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 46 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 46 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 38 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 53 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 35 (F) | +3 | +3.9 |
§ 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 | Ceipal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Ceipal 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