§ The result
Alva Labs and HiPeople tie at 61.
Alva Labs and HiPeople tie at 61 under rubric v1.0 inside the Assessment cohort, arriving there from different criteria. Alva Labs leads 5 of the 7 criteria and HiPeople 2, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 58, HiPeople 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 83% of the weighted advantage HiPeople 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
HiPeople
HiPeople is a Berlin-based hiring platform combining a 400+ test skills and personality assessment library, automated AI reference checks, AI resume/application screening that scores candidates against job criteria, and AI screening calls.
§ The record
Alva Labs and HiPeople are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alva Labs | HiPeople |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SE | DE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · HiPeople 84
4.7 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · HiPeople 62
3.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · HiPeople 58
1.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · HiPeople 60
1.0 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · HiPeople 35
0.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · HiPeople 66
0.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · HiPeople 62
0.1 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus HiPeople.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | HiPeople | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 62 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 84 | -26 | -4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 58 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 62 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 66 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 61 (D) | - | -0.2 |
§ 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 | HiPeople | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 27 | 8 | 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; HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and HiPeople 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: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 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