§ The result
Eightfold AI takes the total, Alva Labs takes more of the criteria.
Eightfold AI (Sourcing) edges Alva Labs (Assessment) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 64 to 61. Alva Labs leads more of the criteria than Eightfold AI — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Eightfold AI leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Eightfold AI. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 58, Eightfold AI 85 — and at an 18% weight it carries 82% of the weighted advantage Eightfold AI holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Alva Labs
Alva Labs sells a science-backed hiring platform whose core is a suite of proprietary psychometric assessments - an adaptive logic (general mental ability) test, a Five-Factor Model personality test, and coding tests - wrapped in candidate management, CV screening, and structured-interview tooling.
Vendor profile
Eightfold AI
Talent intelligence platform offering candidate matching, internal mobility, and career-site personalization on top of a deep-learning talent graph.
§ The record
Alva Labs is filed under Assessment AI, Eightfold AI under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: ATS-integrated.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Alva Labs is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alva Labs | Eightfold AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · Eightfold AI 85
4.9 weighted points to Eightfold AI
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Eightfold AI 60
1.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · Eightfold AI 45
1.1 weighted points to Eightfold AI
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Eightfold AI 60
0.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
20% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · Eightfold AI 75
0.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Eightfold AI 60
0.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · Eightfold AI 50
0.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus Eightfold AI.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Eightfold AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 75 | +3 | +0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 85 | -27 | -4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 64 (D) | -3 | -2.9 |
§ 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 | Alva Labs | Eightfold AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Alva Labs has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Eightfold AI has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and Eightfold AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Eightfold AI, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Eightfold AI last reviewed
- May 21, 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