§ The result
3 points separate Harri and Alooba.
Harri holds a 3-point edge over Alooba under rubric v1.0, 41 to 38, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Alooba takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 4 for Harri, whose share includes FRIA Support, and 1 is level. FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 28, Harri 44 — and at a 15% weight it carries 59% of the weighted advantage Harri holds across the 4 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
Harri
Harri is a frontline workforce platform for hospitality, grocery and care employers whose pre-hire suite pairs a career portal and applicant tracking system with Carri, a conversational AI assistant that screens applicants and coordinates interviews, plus an agentic AI layer (Salli) for scheduling and labor-law compliance.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Harri 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 | Harri |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Harri 44
2.4 weighted points to Harri
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Harri 52
1.1 weighted points to Harri
20% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Harri 35
1.0 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Harri 40
0.5 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Harri 52
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Harri 60
0.2 weighted points to Harri
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Harri.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Harri | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 22 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 44 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 40 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 41 (F) | -3 | -2.7 |
§ 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 | Harri | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 4 | 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 the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 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