HomeCompareAlooba vs Tengai

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Alooba vs Tengai

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

4 points separate Tengai and Alooba.

Tengai holds a 4-point edge over Alooba under rubric v1.0, 42 to 38, across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Tengai leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Alooba leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 22, Tengai 33 — and at an 18% weight it carries 48% of the weighted advantage Tengai holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Tengai under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordAloobaTengai
Price tierLowMid
HeadquartersAUSE
Founded20192019

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 42% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Alooba 22 · Tengai 33

    2.0 weighted points to Tengai

  2. 20% weight · 64% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Alooba 40 · Tengai 45

    1.0 weighted points to Tengai

  3. 15% weight · 80% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Alooba 45 · Tengai 50

    0.8 weighted points to Tengai

  4. 12% weight · 87% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Alooba 55 · Tengai 58

    0.4 weighted points to Tengai

  5. 12% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Alooba 36 · Tengai 33

    0.4 weighted points to Alooba

  6. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Alooba 58 · Tengai 55

    0.2 weighted points to Alooba

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.5.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Alooba minus Tengai.

CategoryWeightAloobaTengaiΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4045-5-1.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2233-11-2.0
FRIA Support15%2828--
Data Governance Disclosure15%4550-5-0.8
Human Oversight Design12%5558-3-0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%3633+3+0.4
Customer Documentation8%5855+3+0.2
Total100%38 (F)42 (F)-4-3.5

§ 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.

CriterionWeightAloobaTengai
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%51Sources on the vendor's own domain71Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31—51Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%286Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain375Sources 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; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Alooba last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Tengai 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.