§ The result
2 points separate Personio and Alooba.
Personio (ATS-integrated) edges Alooba (Assessment) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 40 to 38. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of Personio, with 1 level: Personio is ahead on Post-Market Monitoring and Alooba on Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Post-Market Monitoring, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 36, Personio 48) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 12% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage Personio holds across the 4 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
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Personio 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 | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | DE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Personio 48
1.4 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Personio 52
1.1 weighted points to Personio
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Personio 48
0.8 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Personio 50
0.6 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Personio 25
0.5 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Personio 30
0.3 weighted points to Personio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -1.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 48 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 40 (F) | -2 | -1.9 |
§ 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 | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 8 | Sources 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; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio 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