§ The result
Alva Labs leads HiredScore on all 7 criteria.
Alva Labs scores 61 (D) and HiredScore 52 (F) under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Alva Labs is ahead of HiredScore on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Alva Labs 58 to HiredScore 55. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Alva Labs 52, HiredScore 35) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Alva Labs 78, HiredScore 65), the second being 28% of the weighted advantage Alva Labs holds across the 7 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
HiredScore
AI-driven talent orchestration layer that ranks and routes candidates within an existing ATS. Acquired by Workday in 2024.
§ The record
Alva Labs is filed under Assessment AI, HiredScore 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 | HiredScore |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · HiredScore 65
2.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · HiredScore 35
2.0 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · HiredScore 55
1.9 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · HiredScore 30
1.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · HiredScore 60
0.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · HiredScore 55
0.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · HiredScore 60
0.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus HiredScore.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | HiredScore | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 65 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 55 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 52 (F) | +9 | +9.3 |
§ 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 | HiredScore | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 2 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Alva Labs has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; HiredScore has 9 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 7 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and HiredScore sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 9 for HiredScore, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiredScore 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