§ The result
Gem leads Alooba on all 7 criteria.
Gem finishes 17 points clear of Alooba under rubric v1.0 — 55 against 38 — across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Gem leads every one of the 7 criteria, Alooba none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Alooba 58 to Gem 62. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 22, Gem 66) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 47% of the weighted advantage Gem holds across the 7 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
Gem
Gem is an AI-first recruiting platform combining a talent CRM, AI sourcing and outreach automation, candidate engagement, and a newer applicant tracking system with AI-powered application review and ranking.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Gem 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 | Gem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | High |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Gem 66
7.9 weighted points to Gem
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Gem 58
3.6 weighted points to Gem
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Gem 57
1.8 weighted points to Gem
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Gem 47
1.3 weighted points to Gem
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Gem 35
1.1 weighted points to Gem
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Gem 61
0.7 weighted points to Gem
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Gem 62
0.3 weighted points to Gem
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -16.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -17 beside that -16.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Gem.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Gem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 66 | -44 | -7.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 57 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 61 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 47 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 55 (F) | -17 | -16.7 |
§ 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 | Gem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 19 | 2 | 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; Gem has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Gem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 21 for Gem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Gem 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