§ The result
Sova Assessment leads Humanly by 6 points.
Sova Assessment scores 48 and Humanly 42 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Sova Assessment leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Humanly leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (Humanly 40, Sova Assessment 52) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Humanly 45, Sova Assessment 55), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Sova Assessment holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
Vendor profile
Sova Assessment
Sova Assessment is a UK-based enterprise talent assessment platform combining personality questionnaires, cognitive and ability tests, situational judgement, video interviews, virtual assessment centres and AI-led role simulations into a single occupational-psychology-validated candidate scoring workflow.
§ The record
Humanly is filed under Screening AI, Sova Assessment under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Humanly | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Humanly 45 · Sova Assessment 55
2.0 weighted points to Sova Assessment
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Humanly 40 · Sova Assessment 52
1.8 weighted points to Sova Assessment
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Humanly 30 · Sova Assessment 40
1.2 weighted points to Sova Assessment
8% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Humanly 52 · Sova Assessment 62
0.8 weighted points to Sova Assessment
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Humanly 35 · Sova Assessment 40
0.8 weighted points to Sova Assessment
18% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Humanly 40 · Sova Assessment 38
0.4 weighted points to Humanly
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Humanly 58 · Sova Assessment 55
0.4 weighted points to Humanly
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Humanly minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Humanly | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 38 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 48 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | Humanly | Sova Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Sova Assessment has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sova Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Humanly last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sova Assessment last reviewed
- August 2, 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