§ The result
Arctic Shores leads Pin by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Arctic Shores, filed under Assessment, finishes on 46 and Pin, filed under Sourcing, on 40, 6 points apart. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Arctic Shores, with 1 level: Arctic Shores is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Pin on Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 50, Pin 30 — and at a 20% weight it carries 55% 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
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
§ The record
Arctic Shores is filed under Assessment AI, Pin 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 | Pin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2024 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Pin 30
4.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Pin 45
1.8 weighted points to Pin
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Pin 50
1.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Pin 30
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Pin 50
0.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Pin 55
0.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.4 — 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 +5.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Pin.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Pin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 30 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 45 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 55 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 40 (F) | +6 | +5.4 |
§ 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 | Pin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | 7 | 0 | Sources 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 32 | 5 | 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; Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pin 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