§ The result
UKG leads Alooba by 6 points.
UKG scores 44 and Alooba 38 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Alooba takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 5 for UKG, whose share includes Data Governance Disclosure. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Alooba 45, UKG 56, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 28% of the weighted advantage UKG holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
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
UKG
UKG is an enterprise HCM and workforce-management suite whose UKG Pro Recruiting applicant-tracking module, augmented by the embedded Bryte AI layer, drafts job descriptions and produces profile-match candidate scores to rank and shortlist applicants.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, UKG under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Alooba is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | UKG |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · UKG 56
1.6 weighted points to UKG
20% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · UKG 48
1.6 weighted points to UKG
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · UKG 30
1.4 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · UKG 35
1.1 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · UKG 52
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · UKG 38
0.2 weighted points to UKG
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · UKG 55
0.2 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus UKG.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | UKG | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 48 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 30 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 56 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 38 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 44 (F) | -6 | -5.4 |
§ 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 | UKG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 0 | 2 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 2 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- UKG 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