§ The result
Alva Labs leads Toggl Hire on all 7 criteria.
Alva Labs finishes 24 points clear of Toggl Hire inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 61 (D) against 37 (F). Alva Labs leads every one of the 7 criteria, Toggl Hire none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, Alva Labs 38 to Toggl Hire 30. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Alva Labs 78, Toggl Hire 30, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 39% 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
Toggl Hire
Toggl Hire is a skills-first hiring platform (now being retired) that screens candidates with auto-graded skills tests, async video interviews and homework assignments, bundled with a lightweight ATS.
§ The record
Alva Labs and Toggl Hire 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 | Toggl Hire |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | SE | EE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · Toggl Hire 30
9.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · Toggl Hire 20
6.8 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · Toggl Hire 35
2.0 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Toggl Hire 55
1.9 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Toggl Hire 50
1.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Toggl Hire 52
1.3 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · Toggl Hire 30
1.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +24.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +24 beside that +24.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus Toggl Hire.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Toggl Hire | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 30 | +48 | +9.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 20 | +38 | +6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 55 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 50 | +18 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 37 (F) | +24 | +24.4 |
§ 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 | Toggl Hire | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 4 | Sources 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; Toggl Hire has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; 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 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Toggl Hire, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Toggl Hire 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