§ The result
Findem leads Alooba on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Findem finishes 20 points clear of Alooba under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 38 — across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Findem leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Alooba is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Findem leads is Human Oversight Design, Alooba 55 to Findem 60. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 22, Findem 83) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 57% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
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
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Findem under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
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 | Findem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Findem 83
11.0 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Findem 58
3.6 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Findem 57
1.8 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Findem 38
1.5 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Findem 42
0.7 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Findem 60
0.6 weighted points to Findem
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -19.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -20 beside that -19.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Findem.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Findem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 83 | -61 | -11.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 57 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 42 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 58 (F) | -20 | -19.2 |
§ 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 | Findem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 3 | 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 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 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 5 | 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; Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Findem 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 Findem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Findem last reviewed
- June 7, 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