§ The result
3 points separate SHL and Sova Assessment.
Within the Assessment cohort, SHL edges Sova Assessment by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 51 to 48. SHL leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Sova Assessment leads 2, including FRIA Support, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — SHL 50, Sova Assessment 38 — and at an 18% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage SHL holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
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
SHL and Sova Assessment are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | SHL | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 1977 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
SHL 50 · Sova Assessment 38
2.2 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 60% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
SHL 30 · Sova Assessment 40
1.5 weighted points to Sova Assessment
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
SHL 60 · Sova Assessment 55
1.0 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
SHL 58 · Sova Assessment 52
0.9 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
SHL 58 · Sova Assessment 55
0.4 weighted points to SHL
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
SHL 60 · Sova Assessment 62
0.2 weighted points to Sova Assessment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is SHL minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | SHL | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 51 (F) | 48 (F) | +3 | +2.8 |
§ 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 | SHL | 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- SHL 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