§ The result
Infor Talent Science leads Alooba by 11 points.
Both filed under Assessment, Infor Talent Science and Alooba come out 49 and 38 under rubric v1.0, 11 points in favour of Infor Talent Science. Alooba takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Infor Talent Science, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Alooba 22, Infor Talent Science 42) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Alooba 40, Infor Talent Science 58), the second being 32% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science 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
Infor Talent Science
Infor Talent Science is a cloud-based pre-hire behavioral and cognitive assessment platform. It scores candidates against patented machine-learning 'Performance Profiles' built from the behavior and performance data of an employer's successful incumbents, and gives hiring teams fit scores, recommendations and interview questions that are used to rank and route applicants.
§ The record
Alooba and Infor Talent Science 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 | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2002 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Infor Talent Science 58
3.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Infor Talent Science 42
3.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Infor Talent Science 57
1.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Infor Talent Science 45
1.1 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Infor Talent Science 35
1.1 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Infor Talent Science 50
0.6 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Infor Talent Science 60
0.2 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Infor Talent Science.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 57 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 45 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 49 (F) | -11 | -10.7 |
§ 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 | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | 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 | 5 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 7 | 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; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 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 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Infor Talent Science 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