§ The result
Gem leads Arctic Shores by 9 points.
Gem scores 55 and Arctic Shores 46 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Gem leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Arctic Shores leads 1, including Customer Documentation, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 35, Gem 66 — and at an 18% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Gem holds across the 4 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
Gem
Gem is an AI-first recruiting platform combining a talent CRM, AI sourcing and outreach automation, candidate engagement, and a newer applicant tracking system with AI-powered application review and ranking.
§ The record
Arctic Shores is filed under Assessment AI, Gem under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Arctic Shores is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | Gem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Gem 66
5.6 weighted points to Gem
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Gem 47
2.0 weighted points to Gem
20% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Gem 58
1.6 weighted points to Gem
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Gem 61
0.6 weighted points to Gem
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Gem 62
0.2 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -9.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -9.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Gem.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Gem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 66 | -31 | -5.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 61 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 47 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 62 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 55 (F) | -9 | -9.7 |
§ 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 | Arctic Shores | Gem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 3 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 19 | 2 | 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; Gem has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Gem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 21 for Gem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Gem 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