§ The result
1 point separates Sova Assessment and isolved.
Sova Assessment holds a 1-point edge over isolved under rubric v1.0, 48 to 47, across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to isolved and Sova Assessment, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Sova Assessment holds, headed by FRIA Support, settle the total. FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — isolved 30, Sova Assessment 40 — and at a 15% weight it carries 50% of the weighted advantage Sova Assessment holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
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
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Sova 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 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Sova Assessment is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | isolved | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1986 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 29% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · Sova Assessment 40
1.5 weighted points to Sova Assessment
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Sova Assessment 38
1.3 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Sova Assessment 55
1.0 weighted points to Sova Assessment
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Sova Assessment 40
0.8 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Sova Assessment 62
0.5 weighted points to Sova Assessment
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · Sova Assessment 52
0.1 weighted points to isolved
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 52 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 40 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 62 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 48 (F) | -1 | -0.7 |
§ 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 | isolved | Sova Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 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 isolved and Sova Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved last reviewed
- September 25, 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