§ The result
2 points separate Sova Assessment and RippleMatch.
Sova Assessment (Assessment) edges RippleMatch (Sourcing) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 48 to 46. RippleMatch takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Sova Assessment, whose share includes FRIA Support. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing are the same criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, and RippleMatch holds it (RippleMatch 53, Sova Assessment 38, 18% weight), worth 92% of the weighted advantage RippleMatch builds across the 2 criteria it leads.
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
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
RippleMatch is filed under Candidate sourcing 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 | RippleMatch | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2016 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
RippleMatch 53 · Sova Assessment 38
2.7 weighted points to RippleMatch
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
RippleMatch 27 · Sova Assessment 40
1.9 weighted points to Sova Assessment
20% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
RippleMatch 46 · Sova Assessment 55
1.8 weighted points to Sova Assessment
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
RippleMatch 37 · Sova Assessment 40
0.4 weighted points to Sova Assessment
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
RippleMatch 50 · Sova Assessment 52
0.3 weighted points to Sova Assessment
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
RippleMatch 57 · Sova Assessment 55
0.2 weighted points to RippleMatch
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
RippleMatch 60 · Sova Assessment 62
0.2 weighted points to Sova Assessment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.6 — 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 -2 beside that -1.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is RippleMatch minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | RippleMatch | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 53 | 38 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 27 | 40 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 37 | 40 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 48 (F) | -2 | -1.6 |
§ 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 | Sova Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 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% | 7 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 35 | 7 | 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 |
RippleMatch has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 with a source URL, 7 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 RippleMatch and Sova Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for RippleMatch, across 5 distinct source domains, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- RippleMatch 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