§ The result
3 points separate Alva Labs and Sense.
Alva Labs (Assessment) edges Sense (Screening) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 61 (D) to 58 (F). Alva Labs leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Sense leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 2 are level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 78, Sense 60 — and at a 20% weight it carries 65% of the weighted advantage Alva Labs holds across the 3 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
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
§ The record
Alva Labs is filed under Assessment AI, Sense under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Alva Labs is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alva Labs | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · Sense 60
3.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · Sense 72
2.5 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Sense 58
1.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Sense 62
0.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Sense 64
0.1 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +2.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.2 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 Sense.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 60 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 72 | -14 | -2.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 38 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 58 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 64 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 62 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 58 (F) | +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 | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 3 | 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 | 16 | 3 | 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; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sense last reviewed
- June 7, 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