§ The result
Pinpoint leads Alooba on all 7 criteria.
Pinpoint finishes 19 points clear of Alooba under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 38 — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Pinpoint leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Alooba leads none. The advantage Pinpoint holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Alooba 40, Pinpoint 72, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 34% of the weighted points Pinpoint gains across the 7 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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Pinpoint 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 | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | JE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Pinpoint 72
6.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Pinpoint 42
3.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Pinpoint 68
3.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Pinpoint 52
1.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Pinpoint 38
1.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Pinpoint 64
1.1 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Pinpoint 66
0.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -18.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.6 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 -18.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 72 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 68 | -23 | -3.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 64 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 52 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 57 (F) | -19 | -18.6 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 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 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint last reviewed
- July 17, 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