§ The result
Test Partnership leads Alooba by 12 points.
Both filed under Assessment, Test Partnership and Alooba come out 50 and 38 under rubric v1.0, 12 points in favour of Test Partnership. Alooba takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Post-Market Monitoring among them, against 6 for Test Partnership, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 22, Test Partnership 48) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 40% of the weighted advantage Test Partnership holds 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
Test Partnership
Test Partnership publishes computer-adaptive aptitude tests, the TPAQ personality questionnaire and MindmetriQ game-based cognitive assessments. Employers review, rank and export the resulting norm-referenced percentile and sten scores in its dashboard, through its API or in integrated ATSs.
§ The record
Alooba and Test Partnership 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 | Test Partnership |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ 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 · Test Partnership 48
4.7 weighted points to Test Partnership
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Test Partnership 57
3.4 weighted points to Test Partnership
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Test Partnership 57
1.8 weighted points to Test Partnership
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Test Partnership 36
1.2 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Test Partnership 58
0.4 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Test Partnership 33
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Test Partnership 62
0.3 weighted points to Test Partnership
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -11.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Test Partnership.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Test Partnership | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 57 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 48 | -26 | -4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 36 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 57 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 33 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 50 (F) | -12 | -11.4 |
§ 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 | Test Partnership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | 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 | 4 | 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 | 5 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 6 | 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; Test Partnership has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Test Partnership 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