§ The result
Saville Assessment leads Alooba on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Saville Assessment sits 10 points above Alooba under rubric v1.0, 48 against 38, with both filed under Assessment. Saville Assessment leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Alooba is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Saville Assessment leads is Post-Market Monitoring, Alooba 36 to Saville Assessment 38. The advantage Saville Assessment holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Alooba 22, Saville Assessment 42, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 39% of the weighted points Saville Assessment gains across the 6 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
Saville Assessment
Saville Assessment publishes the Wave personality questionnaires, Swift aptitude tests and situational judgment tests. They are scored automatically against norm groups and delivered through the Oasys platform, the Wave Connect hiring platform (which uses AI to build role profiles from job descriptions) and a two-minute Screener that returns a fit band into the employer's ATS.
§ The record
Alooba and Saville Assessment 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 | Saville Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 2004 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Saville Assessment 42
3.6 weighted points to Saville Assessment
20% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Saville Assessment 50
2.0 weighted points to Saville Assessment
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Saville Assessment 40
1.8 weighted points to Saville Assessment
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Saville Assessment 55
1.5 weighted points to Saville Assessment
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Saville Assessment 38
0.2 weighted points to Saville Assessment
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Saville Assessment 60
0.2 weighted points to Saville Assessment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -9.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -9.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Saville Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Saville Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 38 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 48 (F) | -10 | -9.3 |
§ 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 | Saville Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 34 | 6 | 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; Saville Assessment has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Saville Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 74 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 40 for Saville Assessment, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Saville Assessment 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