§ The result
Arctic Shores leads Pillar by 6 points.
Arctic Shores scores 46 and Pillar 40 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Arctic Shores leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Pillar leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (Arctic Shores 64, Pillar 50) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Arctic Shores 57, Pillar 45), the second being 29% 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
Pillar
Pillar (now "AI Interview Companion by Employ") is an interview intelligence platform that records and transcribes job interviews, generates AI interview guides and highlight clips, and surfaces candidate insights and interviewer-coaching recommendations.
§ The record
Arctic Shores is filed under Assessment AI, Pillar under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | Pillar |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Pillar 45
1.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
20% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Pillar 42
1.6 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Pillar 50
1.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Pillar 48
1.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Pillar 30
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
18% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Pillar 38
0.5 weighted points to Pillar
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Pillar 33
0.4 weighted points to Pillar
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 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 +5.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Pillar.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Pillar | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 45 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 48 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 50 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 40 (F) | +6 | +5.3 |
§ 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 | Pillar | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 7 | 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; Pillar has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 7 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 Pillar, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pillar 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