§ The result
3 points separate Arctic Shores and HighMatch.
Arctic Shores holds a 3-point edge over HighMatch under rubric v1.0, 46 to 43, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Arctic Shores leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while HighMatch leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Post-Market Monitoring is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to HighMatch — Arctic Shores 30, HighMatch 40, on a 12% weight — which is 71% of the weighted advantage HighMatch holds across the 2 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
HighMatch
HighMatch sells pre-employment assessments built by I-O psychologists (personality, cognitive, skills, situational judgment, culture fit and minimum-qualification screens), including the Berke Assessment for small businesses, that score candidates against weighted, role-specific hiring profiles and return job-fit scores, trait reports and tailored interview guides.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and HighMatch 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 | HighMatch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 22% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · HighMatch 40
1.2 weighted points to HighMatch
20% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · HighMatch 45
1.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · HighMatch 30
0.9 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · HighMatch 30
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · HighMatch 52
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · HighMatch 60
0.5 weighted points to HighMatch
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · HighMatch 58
0.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus HighMatch.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | HighMatch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 43 (F) | +3 | +2.2 |
§ 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 | HighMatch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 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; HighMatch has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HighMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for HighMatch, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HighMatch 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