§ The result
Alva Labs leads Tenzo AI by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Alva Labs, filed under Assessment, finishes on 61 (D) and Tenzo AI, filed under Screening, on 56 (F), 5 points apart. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Alva Labs: Alva Labs is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Tenzo AI on Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 78, Tenzo AI 45 — and at a 20% weight it carries 65% of the weighted advantage Alva Labs holds across the 5 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
Tenzo AI
Tenzo AI's AI recruiter, Morgan, screens and interviews applicants by phone, SMS, email, WhatsApp or video in 40+ languages, scores them against employer-defined rubrics with fraud and identity checks, schedules next rounds, and writes scores, transcripts and recordings back to the customer's ATS.
§ The record
Alva Labs is filed under Assessment AI, Tenzo AI under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alva Labs | Tenzo AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2024 |
§ 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 · Tenzo AI 45
6.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · Tenzo AI 83
4.5 weighted points to Tenzo AI
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Tenzo AI 55
1.9 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · Tenzo AI 45
0.8 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Tenzo AI 62
0.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Tenzo AI 60
0.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · Tenzo AI 40
0.3 weighted points to Tenzo AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.0 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 +5.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus Tenzo AI.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Tenzo AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 45 | +33 | +6.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 83 | -25 | -4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 55 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 62 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 56 (F) | +5 | +5.4 |
§ 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 | Tenzo AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 30 | 4 | 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; Tenzo AI has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and Tenzo AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Tenzo AI, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tenzo AI last reviewed
- September 25, 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