Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Alooba vs TestDome
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
TestDome
TestDome sells pay-per-candidate online skills tests for coding, Excel and more than 100 other skills. The tests are scored automatically, and open-ended answers can be scored by AI. AI analysis of webcam and screen proctoring recordings flags possible cheating, and a live code-interview tool is included.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
1 point separates Alooba and TestDome.
Under rubric v1.0, Alooba and TestDome finish 1 point apart, 38 to 37, as two Assessment entries. The 7 criteria split 3 to 2 in favour of Alooba, with 2 level: Alooba is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and TestDome on Data Governance Disclosure. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 22, TestDome 15) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 54% of the weighted advantage Alooba holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Alooba3
- TestDome2
- Level2
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency22 vs 15
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Alooba and TestDome are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Alooba | TestDome |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Low |
| Headquarters | AU | HR |
| Founded | 2019 | 2013 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight39% of the movement so far
Alooba22TestDome151.3 weighted points to Alooba
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight62% of the movement so far
Alooba45TestDome500.8 weighted points to TestDome
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight84% of the movement so far
Alooba36TestDome300.7 weighted points to Alooba
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
Alooba55TestDome520.4 weighted points to Alooba
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Alooba58TestDome600.2 weighted points to TestDome
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +1.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus TestDome, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | TestDome | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 15 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 30 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38F | 37F | +1 | +1.4 |
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 | TestDome | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 5 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 5 | 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; TestDome has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 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 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for TestDome, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TestDome 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
Scored against