§ The result
HiringBranch leads Arctic Shores by 6 points.
HiringBranch scores 52 and Arctic Shores 46 under rubric v1.0 — a 6-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. HiringBranch leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Arctic Shores leads 2, including Human Oversight Design, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 35, HiringBranch 60 — and at an 18% weight it carries 58% of the weighted advantage HiringBranch holds across the 3 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
HiringBranch
HiringBranch is an AI skills-assessment platform that measures 50+ communication and soft skills from candidates' open-ended, conversational job-simulation responses (text and voice) to screen and rank applicants for customer-facing roles.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and HiringBranch 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 | HiringBranch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | CA |
| Founded | 2013 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · HiringBranch 60
4.5 weighted points to HiringBranch
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · HiringBranch 60
2.0 weighted points to HiringBranch
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · HiringBranch 40
1.2 weighted points to HiringBranch
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · HiringBranch 52
0.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · HiringBranch 55
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.5 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 -6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus HiringBranch.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | HiringBranch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 64 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 52 (F) | -6 | -6.9 |
§ 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 | HiringBranch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 13 | 6 | Audit reportSources 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; HiringBranch has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for HiringBranch, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiringBranch last reviewed
- July 17, 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