§ The result
Glider AI leads Alooba on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Glider AI sits 14 points above Alooba under rubric v1.0, 52 against 38, with both filed under Assessment. Alooba is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Glider AI takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Customer Documentation, Alooba 58 to Glider AI 60. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 22, Glider AI 68 — and at an 18% weight it carries 60% of the weighted advantage Glider AI 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
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
§ The record
Alooba and Glider AI are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Glider AI 68
8.3 weighted points to Glider AI
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Glider AI 52
2.4 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Glider AI 54
1.3 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Glider AI 35
1.1 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Glider AI 40
0.5 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Glider AI 60
0.2 weighted points to Glider AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -13.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -13.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 68 | -46 | -8.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 54 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 40 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 52 (F) | -14 | -13.7 |
§ 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 | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 6 | 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; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Glider AI 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