§ The result
Arctic Shores leads Workstream by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Arctic Shores, filed under Assessment, finishes on 46 and Workstream, filed under Screening, on 39, 7 points apart. Arctic Shores leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Workstream leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Arctic Shores 35, Workstream 20, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 34% 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
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
Arctic Shores is filed under Assessment AI, Workstream 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 | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Workstream 20
2.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Workstream 40
2.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Workstream 47
1.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Workstream 27
1.2 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Workstream 56
0.6 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Workstream 61
0.6 weighted points to Workstream
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Workstream 35
0.6 weighted points to Workstream
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 47 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 61 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 39 (F) | +7 | +6.8 |
§ 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 | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | 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; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream 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