§ The result
Arctic Shores leads Cappfinity by 6 points.
Arctic Shores scores 46 and Cappfinity 40 under rubric v1.0 — a 6-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Arctic Shores: Arctic Shores is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Cappfinity on Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 50, Cappfinity 36 — and at a 20% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Arctic Shores 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
Cappfinity
Cappfinity sells strengths-, skills- and cognitive-reasoning assessments, task-based job simulations, a digital assessment centre and an asynchronous video interview platform with optional AI-assisted scoring, and is used mainly for graduate and early-careers hiring.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and Cappfinity are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | Cappfinity |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2013 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Cappfinity 36
2.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Cappfinity 28
1.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Cappfinity 28
1.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Cappfinity 38
1.0 weighted points to Cappfinity
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Cappfinity 52
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Cappfinity 56
0.6 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Cappfinity 52
0.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Cappfinity.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Cappfinity | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 36 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 40 (F) | +6 | +6.0 |
§ 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 | Cappfinity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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 | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 29 | 7 | Sources 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; Cappfinity has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 29 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cappfinity sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for Cappfinity, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cappfinity 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