§ The result
Hireology leads Alooba on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Hireology (ATS-integrated) opens a 19-point lead on Alooba (Assessment), 57 to 38. Alooba is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Hireology takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, Alooba 55 to Hireology 57. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 22, Hireology 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 61% of the weighted advantage Hireology 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
Hireology
Hireology is an applicant tracking and hiring platform for multi-location auto dealers, healthcare providers and hospitality operators. Its AI features score applicants against employer-defined criteria (AI Match) and run rubric-scored, voice-based first-round screening interviews (AI Interview).
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Hireology 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 | Hireology |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Hireology 83
11.0 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Hireology 59
2.8 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Hireology 50
2.0 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Hireology 35
1.1 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Hireology 52
1.1 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Hireology 57
0.2 weighted points to Hireology
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -18.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -18.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Hireology.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Hireology | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 83 | -61 | -11.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 59 | -23 | -2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 57 (F) | -19 | -18.1 |
§ 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 | Hireology | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 4 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 25 | 4 | 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; Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Hireology sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Hireology 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