§ The result
4 points separate Arctic Shores and Tengai.
Arctic Shores (Assessment) edges Tengai (Screening) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42. Arctic Shores leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including FRIA Support, while Tengai leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Arctic Shores 64, Tengai 55) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is FRIA Support at 15% (Arctic Shores 35, Tengai 28), 25% of the weighted advantage Arctic Shores builds across the 5 criteria it leads.
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
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
Arctic Shores is filed under Assessment AI, Tengai 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 | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SE |
| Founded | 2013 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 22% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Tengai 28
1.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Tengai 50
1.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Tengai 45
1.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Tengai 55
0.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
18% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Tengai 33
0.4 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Tengai 33
0.4 weighted points to Tengai
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Tengai 58
0.2 weighted points to Tengai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 55 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 42 (F) | +4 | +3.6 |
§ 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 | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 4 | 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 | 37 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai 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