§ The result
2 points separate Arctic Shores and Equalture.
Within the Assessment cohort, Arctic Shores edges Equalture by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 44. Arctic Shores leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Equalture leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Arctic Shores 30, Equalture 38) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Arctic Shores 50, Equalture 45), the second being 32% of the weighted advantage Arctic Shores holds across the 5 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
Equalture
Equalture is a game-based pre-employment assessment platform whose short browser games measure candidates' cognitive abilities and behavioural tendencies and convert them into a Fit Score ranked against an employer-specific "Success Profile" derived from that employer's own top performers.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and Equalture 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 | Equalture |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | GB | NL |
| Founded | 2013 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 20% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Equalture 45
1.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Equalture 38
1.0 weighted points to Equalture
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Equalture 40
0.9 weighted points to Equalture
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Equalture 30
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Equalture 50
0.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Equalture 60
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Equalture 55
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +1.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Equalture.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Equalture | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 44 (F) | +2 | +1.2 |
§ 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 | Equalture | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Equalture has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for Equalture, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Equalture last reviewed
- August 2, 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