HomeCompareHireQuotient vs Saville Assessment

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

HireQuotient vs Saville Assessment

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Saville Assessment leads HireQuotient by 14 points.

Saville Assessment, filed under Assessment, comes out 14 points above HireQuotient, filed under Sourcing: 48 against 34 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Saville Assessment: Saville Assessment is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HireQuotient on Human Oversight Design. The advantage Saville Assessment holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (HireQuotient 18, Saville Assessment 42, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 31% of the weighted points Saville Assessment gains across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

HireQuotient is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Saville Assessment under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordHireQuotientSaville Assessment
Price tierLowEnterprise
HeadquartersSGGB
Founded20212004

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 30% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    HireQuotient 18 · Saville Assessment 42

    4.3 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  2. 20% weight · 51% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    HireQuotient 35 · Saville Assessment 50

    3.0 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  3. 15% weight · 70% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    HireQuotient 22 · Saville Assessment 40

    2.7 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  4. 15% weight · 86% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    HireQuotient 40 · Saville Assessment 55

    2.3 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  5. 12% weight · 93% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    HireQuotient 30 · Saville Assessment 38

    1.0 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  6. 8% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    HireQuotient 50 · Saville Assessment 60

    0.8 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    HireQuotient 57 · Saville Assessment 55

    0.2 weighted points to HireQuotient

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -13.8.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is HireQuotient minus Saville Assessment.

CategoryWeightHireQuotientSaville AssessmentΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3550-15-3.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%1842-24-4.3
FRIA Support15%2240-18-2.7
Data Governance Disclosure15%4055-15-2.3
Human Oversight Design12%5755+2+0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%3038-8-1.0
Customer Documentation8%5060-10-0.8
Total100%34 (F)48 (F)-14-13.8

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHireQuotientSaville Assessment
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%60Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%21Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%245Sources on the vendor's own domain346Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 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 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain, and 40 for Saville Assessment, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
HireQuotient last reviewed
September 25, 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.