§ The result
SHL leads RippleMatch by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, SHL, filed under Assessment, finishes on 51 and RippleMatch, filed under Sourcing, on 46, 5 points apart. SHL leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while RippleMatch leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — RippleMatch 46, SHL 60 — and at a 20% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage SHL holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
RippleMatch
RippleMatch is an early-career recruiting platform that sources students and recent graduates for employers' roles, ranks applicants with a 0-100 Fit Score built from criteria the recruiter configures, and adds verified skill badges, applicant review, interview scheduling and campus-event tools.
Vendor profile
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
RippleMatch is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, SHL 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 SHL is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | RippleMatch | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2016 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
RippleMatch 46 · SHL 60
2.8 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
RippleMatch 50 · SHL 58
1.2 weighted points to SHL
18% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
RippleMatch 53 · SHL 50
0.5 weighted points to RippleMatch
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
RippleMatch 27 · SHL 30
0.4 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
RippleMatch 37 · SHL 40
0.4 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
RippleMatch 57 · SHL 58
0.1 weighted points to SHL
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.5 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 -4.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is RippleMatch minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | RippleMatch | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 46 | 60 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 27 | 30 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 37 | 40 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 51 (F) | -5 | -4.4 |
§ 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 | RippleMatch | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 35 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
RippleMatch has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for RippleMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for RippleMatch, across 5 distinct source domains, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- RippleMatch last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SHL last reviewed
- June 7, 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