§ The result
Criteria leads Saville Assessment by 5 points.
Criteria finishes 5 points ahead of Saville Assessment under rubric v1.0, 53 to 48, both scored as Assessment entries. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Criteria, with 1 level: Criteria is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Saville Assessment on FRIA Support. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Criteria 68, Saville Assessment 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 5 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
Saville Assessment
Saville Assessment publishes the Wave personality questionnaires, Swift aptitude tests and situational judgment tests. They are scored automatically against norm groups and delivered through the Oasys platform, the Wave Connect hiring platform (which uses AI to build role profiles from job descriptions) and a two-minute Screener that returns a fit band into the employer's ATS.
§ The record
Criteria and Saville Assessment 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 | Saville Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2006 | 2004 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Saville Assessment 50
3.6 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Saville Assessment 40
1.2 weighted points to Saville Assessment
18% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Saville Assessment 42
1.1 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Saville Assessment 55
1.1 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · Saville Assessment 38
0.5 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Saville Assessment 55
0.1 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.5 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 +5.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Saville Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Saville Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 50 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 48 (F) | +5 | +5.1 |
§ 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 | Saville Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 1 | Sources 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 34 | 6 | 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; Saville Assessment has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Saville Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 40 for Saville Assessment, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Saville Assessment 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