§ The result
SHL leads Alooba on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 scores the Assessment entries SHL and Alooba at 51 and 38, a gap of 13 points. SHL leads every one of the 7 criteria, Alooba none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, Alooba 28 to SHL 30. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 22, SHL 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage SHL holds 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
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
Alooba and SHL 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 | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · SHL 50
5.0 weighted points to SHL
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · SHL 60
4.0 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · SHL 58
1.9 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · SHL 40
0.5 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · SHL 58
0.4 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · SHL 30
0.3 weighted points to SHL
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · SHL 60
0.2 weighted points to SHL
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -12.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 50 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 40 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 51 (F) | -13 | -12.3 |
§ 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 | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 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 | 15 | 4 | 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; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SHL last reviewed
- June 7, 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