§ The result
Alooba leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Alooba, filed under Assessment, finishes on 38 and Emi, filed under Screening, on 33, 5 points apart. Alooba takes all 7 criteria from Emi without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Data Governance Disclosure, Alooba 45 to Emi 44. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 40, Emi 28 — and at a 20% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Alooba holds across the 7 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
Emi
Emi runs AI agents on WhatsApp, SMS and Messenger that screen and score frontline job applicants against employer-set criteria, schedule interviews, and collect hiring documents and check them against Mexican government databases.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Emi under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Alooba is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | Emi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | AR |
| Founded | 2019 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Emi 28
2.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Emi 44
1.3 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Emi 48
0.8 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Emi 18
0.7 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Emi 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Emi 44
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Emi 35
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +6.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Emi.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Emi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 18 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 44 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 35 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 33 (F) | +5 | +6.0 |
§ 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 | Emi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 a separate 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 | 19 | 7 | Sources 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; Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Emi sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 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