§ The result
Alva Labs leads Rippling by 5 points.
Alva Labs scores 61 (D) and Rippling 56 (F) under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Alva Labs leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Rippling leads 1, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 58, Rippling 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 50% of the weighted advantage Alva Labs holds across the 6 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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
Alva Labs is filed under Assessment AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ 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 · Rippling 42
2.9 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 58% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · Rippling 45
1.1 weighted points to Rippling
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · Rippling 73
1.0 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Rippling 64
0.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · Rippling 47
0.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Rippling 60
0.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Rippling 64
0.3 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 73 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 64 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 47 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 64 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 56 (F) | +5 | +4.7 |
§ 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 | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 12 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Alva Labs has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs 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: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling 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