§ The result
Alooba leads XOR on all 7 criteria.
Alooba scores 38 and XOR 30 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Alooba takes all 7 criteria and XOR none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Alooba 28 to XOR 25. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 40, XOR 20) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 47% of the weighted advantage Alooba 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
XOR
XOR is a text-first conversational-AI recruiting platform that pre-screens and scores high-volume and hourly candidates with recruiter-defined knockout/scoring questions over SMS, WhatsApp, and Messenger, then auto-schedules interviews on the recruiter's calendar.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, XOR under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | XOR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · XOR 20
4.0 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · XOR 40
1.8 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · XOR 48
0.8 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · XOR 18
0.7 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · XOR 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · XOR 42
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · XOR 33
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus XOR.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | XOR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 20 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 18 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 33 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 30 (F) | +8 | +8.6 |
§ 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 | XOR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 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 | 11 | 7 | 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; XOR has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 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 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for XOR, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- XOR last reviewed
- July 17, 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