§ The result
Bryq leads Arctic Shores by 11 points.
Bryq sits 11 points above Arctic Shores under rubric v1.0, 57 against 46, with both filed under Assessment. Bryq leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Arctic Shores leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 35, Bryq 70 — and at an 18% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage Bryq holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Arctic Shores
Arctic Shores sells a task-based psychometric assessment platform ("Una") that scores candidates on behaviour captured during short interactive tasks - covering personality, workplace intelligence and learning agility - rather than self-report questionnaires or CV review.
Vendor profile
Bryq
Bryq is a science-based talent-intelligence platform whose core product is a short, blind, chatbot-driven pre-hire assessment scoring candidates on cognitive ability, personality/behavioral traits, and job skills to produce a job-fit "match" score used for hiring and internal mobility.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and Bryq are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | Bryq |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Bryq 70
6.3 weighted points to Bryq
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Bryq 55
3.0 weighted points to Bryq
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Bryq 54
0.8 weighted points to Bryq
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Bryq 40
0.8 weighted points to Bryq
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Bryq 62
0.8 weighted points to Bryq
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Bryq 54
0.2 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Bryq 66
0.2 weighted points to Bryq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Bryq.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Bryq | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 70 | -35 | -6.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 54 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 55 | -25 | -3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 66 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 57 (F) | -11 | -11.5 |
§ 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 | Arctic Shores | Bryq | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources 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% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 20 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Bryq has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Bryq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 24 for Bryq, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Bryq 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