§ The result
HiredScore leads Arctic Shores by 6 points.
HiredScore scores 52 and Arctic Shores 46 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. HiredScore leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Arctic Shores leads 3, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 35, HiredScore 55 — and at an 18% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage HiredScore 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
HiredScore
AI-driven talent orchestration layer that ranks and routes candidates within an existing ATS. Acquired by Workday in 2024.
§ The record
Arctic Shores is filed under Assessment AI, HiredScore under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Arctic Shores is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | HiredScore |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · HiredScore 55
3.6 weighted points to HiredScore
20% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · HiredScore 65
3.0 weighted points to HiredScore
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · HiredScore 30
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · HiredScore 35
0.6 weighted points to HiredScore
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · HiredScore 60
0.5 weighted points to HiredScore
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · HiredScore 60
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · HiredScore 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 -6.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 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 -6.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus HiredScore.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | HiredScore | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 65 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 55 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 52 (F) | -6 | -6.3 |
§ 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 | HiredScore | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 2 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; HiredScore has 9 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 7 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiredScore sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 9 for HiredScore, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiredScore last reviewed
- May 21, 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