§ The result
Criteria leads HighMatch by 10 points.
Rubric v1.0 scores the Assessment entries Criteria and HighMatch at 53 and 43, a gap of 10 points. Criteria leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while HighMatch leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Criteria 68, HighMatch 45 — and at a 20% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
Vendor profile
HighMatch
HighMatch sells pre-employment assessments built by I-O psychologists (personality, cognitive, skills, situational judgment, culture fit and minimum-qualification screens), including the Berke Assessment for small businesses, that score candidates against weighted, role-specific hiring profiles and return job-fit scores, trait reports and tailored interview guides.
§ The record
Criteria and HighMatch 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 | Criteria | HighMatch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2006 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · HighMatch 45
4.6 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · HighMatch 30
3.2 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · HighMatch 52
1.5 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · HighMatch 60
0.5 weighted points to HighMatch
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · HighMatch 30
0.3 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · HighMatch 40
0.2 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · HighMatch 58
0.2 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus HighMatch.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | HighMatch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 45 | +23 | +4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 43 (F) | +10 | +9.6 |
§ 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 | Criteria | HighMatch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; HighMatch has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HighMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for HighMatch, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HighMatch 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