§ The result
Greenhouse leads Alooba on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 29 points between Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Alooba (Assessment): 67 (D) for Greenhouse, 38 (F) for Alooba. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Alooba leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 22, Greenhouse 86) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 40% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse 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
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Greenhouse under ATS-integrated 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 | Greenhouse |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Greenhouse 86
11.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Greenhouse 78
7.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Greenhouse 64
2.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Greenhouse 58
2.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Greenhouse 42
2.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Greenhouse 66
1.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Greenhouse 64
0.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -28.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 28.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -29 beside that -28.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Greenhouse.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Greenhouse | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 78 | -38 | -7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 86 | -64 | -11.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 42 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 64 | -19 | -2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 66 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 58 | -22 | -2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 67 (D) | -29 | -28.5 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 16 | 1 | 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; Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Greenhouse 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 Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Greenhouse 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