§ The result
Alooba and HirePro tie at 38.
Alooba (Assessment) and HirePro (Screening) tie at 38 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Alooba leads 4 of the 7 criteria and HirePro 2, with 1 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Article 11 Technical Documentation, at 20%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Alooba (Alooba 40, HirePro 30), 66% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Bias Audit Transparency, Alooba 22 to HirePro 33.
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
HirePro
HirePro's AI Recruiter matches resumes to a job, shortlists candidates and runs AI-led interviews that score each answer with written reasoning and a fraud and identity check, alongside proctored assessments, video interviews and campus-hiring workflows.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, HirePro under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | HirePro |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | IN |
| Founded | 2019 | 2004 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · HirePro 30
2.0 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · HirePro 33
2.0 weighted points to HirePro
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · HirePro 50
0.8 weighted points to HirePro
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · HirePro 52
0.5 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · HirePro 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · HirePro 35
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +0.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus HirePro.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | HirePro | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 33 | -11 | -2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 35 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 38 (F) | - | +0.3 |
§ 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 | HirePro | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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 | 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 | 21 | 6 | 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; HirePro has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 6 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 HirePro, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HirePro 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