§ The result
Alva Labs leads X0PA AI on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Alva Labs sits 13 points above X0PA AI under rubric v1.0, 61 (D) against 48 (F), with both filed under Assessment. Alva Labs leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so X0PA AI is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Alva Labs leads is Human Oversight Design, Alva Labs 63 to X0PA AI 57. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 78, X0PA AI 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 44% 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
X0PA AI
X0PA AI is a Singapore-based B2B AI recruitment platform (applicant tracking system) that sources, screens, scores, and ranks candidates using proprietary predictive-scoring models (BRIQ Score and Suitability Score) plus the X0PA ROOM video-interview/assessment product, marketed around bias-reduced, "responsible and explainable" AI hiring.
§ The record
Alva Labs and X0PA AI 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 | X0PA AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | SE | SG |
| Founded | 2017 | 2017 |
§ 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 · X0PA AI 50
5.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · X0PA AI 44
2.5 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · X0PA AI 56
1.8 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alva Labs 52 · X0PA AI 40
1.4 weighted points to Alva Labs
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · X0PA AI 57
0.7 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · X0PA AI 60
0.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +12.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +12.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus X0PA AI.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | X0PA AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 50 | +28 | +5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 44 | +14 | +2.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 38 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 56 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 57 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 48 (F) | +13 | +12.7 |
§ 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 | X0PA AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 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 | 12 | 6 | Sources 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; X0PA AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and X0PA AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 18 for X0PA AI, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- X0PA AI 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