§ The result
SHL leads Arctic Shores by 5 points.
SHL scores 51 and Arctic Shores 46 under rubric v1.0 — a 5-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. SHL leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Arctic Shores leads 2, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 35, SHL 50 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage SHL 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
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and SHL 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 | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2013 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · SHL 50
2.7 weighted points to SHL
20% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · SHL 60
2.0 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · SHL 40
1.2 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · SHL 30
0.8 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · SHL 60
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · SHL 58
0.2 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · SHL 58
0.1 weighted points to SHL
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 50 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 51 (F) | -5 | -5.2 |
§ 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 | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | 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 | 15 | 4 | Sources 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; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SHL 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