§ The result
Dover leads Alooba by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Dover, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 45 and Alooba, filed under Assessment, on 38, 7 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Dover: Dover is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Alooba on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 22, Dover 52 — and at an 18% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage Dover 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
Dover
Dover is an AI recruiting platform for startups offering a free applicant tracking system, candidate sourcing via a LinkedIn/Copilot browser extension, OpenAI/Anthropic-powered 0-100 applicant scoring, and a fractional-recruiter marketplace.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Dover under Candidate sourcing 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 | Dover |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Low |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Dover 52
5.4 weighted points to Dover
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Dover 34
1.2 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Dover 44
1.0 weighted points to Dover
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Dover 50
0.8 weighted points to Dover
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Dover 58
0.4 weighted points to Dover
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Dover 30
0.3 weighted points to Dover
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Dover 60
0.2 weighted points to Dover
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.1 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 -6.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Dover.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Dover | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 34 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 52 | -30 | -5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 44 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 45 (F) | -7 | -6.7 |
§ 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 | Dover | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 0 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 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; Dover has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Dover sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 17 for Dover, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Dover 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