§ The result
Alva Labs leads Wonderlic on all 7 criteria.
Alva Labs finishes 18 points clear of Wonderlic inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 61 (D) against 43 (F). Alva Labs leads every one of the 7 criteria, Wonderlic none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Bias Audit Transparency, Alva Labs 58 to Wonderlic 48. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (Alva Labs 68, Wonderlic 38) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Alva Labs 78, Wonderlic 52), the second being 29% 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
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
§ The record
Alva Labs and Wonderlic 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 | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · Wonderlic 52
5.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Wonderlic 38
4.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · Wonderlic 33
2.3 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · Wonderlic 25
1.9 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · Wonderlic 48
1.8 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Wonderlic 52
1.3 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Wonderlic 55
1.0 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +18.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +18 beside that +18.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 52 | +26 | +5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 25 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 38 | +30 | +4.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 33 | +19 | +2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 55 | +13 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 43 (F) | +18 | +18.1 |
§ 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 | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | 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 | 9 | 6 | 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; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 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 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic 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