Equalture
HireAIScore rates Equalture 44 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed August 2, 2026. Equalture ranks 48 of 82 vendors rated in Assessment AI, against a category average of 46. That score is drawn from 26 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for Equalture — 19 with a cited source, 7 recording that nothing was located.
Score breakdown
Equalture, criterion by criterion
Each rubric criterion is scored out of 100 on the cited evidence, then weighted into the total.
Weighted contribution shown to the right of each bar.
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Weight 20% · category avg 50
45
+9.0
Bias Audit Transparency
Weight 18% · category avg 41
40
+7.2
FRIA Support
Weight 15% · category avg 31
30
+4.5
Data Governance Disclosure
Weight 15% · category avg 53
55
+8.3
Human Oversight Design
Weight 12% · category avg 55
50
+6.0
Post-Market Monitoring
Weight 12% · category avg 38
38
+4.6
Customer Documentation
Weight 8% · category avg 58
60
+4.8
Total weighted score
44.3(rounded to 44 for display)
Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 82 Assessment AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.
Strongest criterion
Customer Documentation
60raw / 100
Contributes 4.8 to the total. 60 against a 58 category average.
Weakest criterion
FRIA Support
30raw / 100
Contributes 4.5 to the total. 30 against a 31 category average.
Cited evidence
The evidence behind the score
Every score is backed by at least one cited piece of evidence. Open a criterion to see what was found, when, and where.
Download diligence recordEvidence ledger
- Items
- 26
- Documentation
- 15
- Public statement
- 4
- Absence
- 7
- With a source URL
- 19 of 26
- Source hostnames
- 4
- Fewest items
- 3
- FRIA Support
These figures measure how thoroughly Equalture was reviewed, not how Equalture performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.
Article 11 Technical Documentation
4 items45
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The science page states assessments were 'Developed according to the COTAN Review System' of the Dutch Institute of Psychologists and are 'Extensively validated, with a focus on Reliability and Construct Validity', but its call to action is 'Request our validation studies' rather than a published document.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A landing page announces a Science Manual covering 'the scientific validation, assessment creation, trait selection and the reasoning for picking the gamified format', but the page publishes none of that content and offers no direct PDF.
https://www.equalture.com/research/equaltures-science-manual/
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The trust centre lists the Science Manual as a Document whose access control is 'Request access'- one of only two gated items among 55 resources - confirming the technical pack is not publicly downloadable.
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
No model card, system card, algorithmic transparency statement, instructions-for-use, AI policy or ISO/IEC 42001 certification was found on /science/, /platform/, /security-and-compliance/, the support knowledge centre, the trust centre's 47 published policies, or across the full page and post sitemaps.
Bias Audit Transparency
5 items40
- Public statementCaptured Aug 2, 2026
Equalture claims 'We meticulously test our assessments for adverse impacts regarding demographics, colour blindness, AD(H)D, ASD, Dyslexia, and more' and that it continuously researches to 'identify and mitigate any potential biases', but publishes no methodology, metrics, thresholds or results.
- Public statementCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The FAQ asserts 'Independent validation has shown that Equalture's games are inclusive across age, gender, cultural background, and neurodiversity' without naming the independent party, giving a date, or linking to the underlying study.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A 2022 Neurodiversity and Inclusion Report page states its aim is 'to test whether we can detect possible disadvantages for any group' across ADHD, dyslexia, ASD, colour blindness and OCD, but publishes no sample sizes, statistics or conclusions on the page.
https://www.equalture.com/research/neurodiversity-and-inclusion-report-equalture/
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A freely downloadable Q2 2022 Candidate Experience report gives a 'Demographic Breakdown' by gender, age bucket, ethnicity, education and country across 3,368 candidate ratings - but reports satisfaction scores, not assessment outcomes or selection rates, so it is not an adverse-impact analysis.
https://resources.equalture.com/hubfs/Candidate%20Experience%20Report%20Q2%202022.pdf
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
No NYC Local Law 144 bias audit, and no audit by any recognised third party (BABL AI, Warden AI, Holistic AI, DCI, ORCAA, Credo AI, ConductorAI) was found on the science, research, security or trust-centre pages, in the full page and post sitemaps, or via targeted web searches.
FRIA Support
3 items30
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
No Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment template, Article 27 guidance, EU AI Act explainer, high-risk classification statement, conformity-assessment or CE-marking material was found anywhere: the page sitemap (~90 URLs), the three post sitemaps (~557 URLs), /science/, /security-and-compliance/, /faq/, /privacy/, /terms/terms-of-use/, the support knowledge centre and the trust centre all return zero AI Act references.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The Sprinto-hosted trust centre lists exactly two compliance frameworks - ISO 27001 and GDPR - with no AI-governance framework, no ISO 42001 and no AI Act readiness statement to support a deployer's FRIA.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A DPA is published as a directly viewable trust-centre document, giving deployers the data-processing half of an impact assessment, but none of the 47 policies listed addresses AI risk, bias management or fundamental-rights impact.
Data Governance Disclosure
3 items55
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The security and compliance page presents ISO 27001 and GDPR certification badges and states 'Our internal processes ensure ongoing information security management and meet internationally recognised standards', directing readers to the trust centre for detail.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The trust centre publishes 47 policies including Data Classification, Data Retention, Data Protection, Data Backup, Encryption, Privacy by Design, Vendor Management and PII Breach Notification, plus directly viewable ISO27001 and GDPR certificates, a DPA and a Pentest Executive Summary.
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
No disclosure of the data used to build or calibrate the scoring models, no training-data or feature exclusion list, no named subprocessor register, and no ISO/IEC 42001 or SOC 2 - the trust centre's policy library contains no AI, machine-learning or model-risk policy at all.
Human Oversight Design
3 items50
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The platform page frames results as decision support, supplying 'Interview Guides and Talent Development Guides' that structure a human's downstream interview and onboarding decisions rather than automating them.
- Public statementCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A candidate-facing help article concedes the scores are probabilistic - indicating someone is 'more likely' to perform well rather than providing certainty - and encourages recruiters to discuss results with the candidate, but describes no appeal or correction route.
https://support.equalture.com/en/articles/8450930-not-recognising-yourself-in-your-scores
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
No documented override control, reviewer audit log, in-product explanation of how a Fit Score is composed, per-jurisdiction compliance toggle, or candidate contestability process appears on /platform/, /neuro-assessment-games/, the 16-article support knowledge centre or the trust centre; conversely /neuro-assessment-games/ markets 'instant rankings' that let recruiters 'skip manual reviews and speed up hiring'.
Post-Market Monitoring
4 items38
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The trust centre publishes viewable Incident Management, Incident Management Procedure, Vulnerability Management, Data Breach Notification and Personal Data Breach Notification policies, plus a Pentest Executive Summary, with the full Pentest Report gated behind 'Request access'.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The only contact channel offered on the trust centre is the general support@equalture.com address; no security@ address, vulnerability disclosure programme or bug bounty is listed.
- Public statementCaptured Aug 2, 2026
The platform's 'Track' phase claims models are continuously refined by linking assessment outcomes to on-the-job performance and retention, but this is an internal feedback loop with no public monitoring output, fairness dashboard or drift reporting.
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
status.equalture.com and trust.equalture.com do not resolve (DNS failure), and no changelog, release-notes or product-update page exists in the page sitemap or across the ~557 URLs in the three post sitemaps.
Customer Documentation
4 items60
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A public FAQ answers questions on scientific validation, bias reduction, how Success Profiles are built, how Fit Scores are used for ranking and ATS automation, accessibility and neurodiversity, and the 14 supported languages.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
A research hub indexes nine dated published reports and whitepapers from 2022 to 2025, including candidate-experience, neurodiversity and inclusion, cognition-and-education and game-based-versus-traditional-assessment validity studies.
- DocumentationCaptured Aug 2, 2026
An Intercom-hosted knowledge centre offers seven collections and roughly 16 articles covering teams, jobs, applicants, settings and integrations, but none addressing scoring mechanics, data governance, bias or compliance.
- AbsenceCaptured Aug 2, 2026
No deployer compliance guidance exists: no NYC Local Law 144 page, no EU AI Act or high-risk-provider guidance, and no candidate-notice or AEDT-disclosure templates were found across the page sitemap, post sitemaps, support centre or trust centre.
Editorial notes
Company overview
Equalture B.V. is a Rotterdam-based HR-tech company (registered address Mauritsweg 35, Rotterdam; Dutch Chamber of Commerce no. 69620172) founded by twin sisters Charlotte Melkert (CEO) and Fleur Melkert (CCO), with Jaap Haagmans as CTO. Its product replaces CV screening with short neuroscience-derived games - typically 15 to 45 minutes, available in 14 languages - that measure cognitive abilities and behavioural tendencies from gameplay rather than self-report. Employers first have incumbent staff play the games to build a role-specific "Success Profile" (marketed as Top-Performer Signal Mapping and a Success DNA Engine), enriched with industry benchmarks; candidates are then scored and ranked against that profile, with results pushed into roughly eighteen named ATS integrations including Workday, SAP SuccessFactors, Greenhouse, SmartRecruiters, Lever and Teamtailor. Named customers include DHL Express, VodafoneZiggo, Ahold Delhaize, Rituals, Van Lanschot Kempen, G4S and Politie Nederland.
Regulatory exposure
Equalture is an EU-established provider of an AI system used for the recruitment and selection of natural persons, placing it squarely in Annex III point 4 of the EU AI Act and making it the archetypal high-risk provider facing Article 9 risk management, Article 10 data governance, Article 11 technical documentation, Article 13 transparency, Article 14 human oversight, Article 15 accuracy and Article 72 post-market monitoring duties, while its EU employer customers face Article 26 deployer duties and Article 27 FRIAs. Dutch and EU data protection law applies directly: the privacy policy sets a 12-month retention period for assessment results, discloses possible transfers outside the EEA and states that "No personal decisions are made solely by automated processing," a GDPR Article 22 posture though the Article is never cited. US exposure appears minimal - no US office, NYC Local Law 144 bias audit, Illinois AI Video Interview Act or Colorado SB 24-205 material was found anywhere on the site. The striking gap is that a full crawl of the company's page sitemap (~90 pages) and post sitemaps (~557 URLs) plus the Sprinto-hosted trust centre surfaced zero references to the EU AI Act, high-risk classification, conformity assessment or CE marking, and no AI-specific policy among the 47 governance policies published in the trust centre.
Path to a higher score
The fastest gains are ungating what already exists: the Science Manual and the "validation studies" the science page invites visitors to request should be published as free downloads, and the Neurodiversity and Inclusion Report should show its actual findings - sample sizes, subgroup pass rates and effect sizes - rather than only stating its aim. Beyond that, Equalture should publish a genuine adverse-impact report covering assessment scores (not just candidate satisfaction ratings) broken down by gender, age, ethnicity and disability status, name the independent party behind the "independent validation" claim in its FAQ, and commission a dated third-party algorithmic audit from a recognised auditor with a downloadable report. On the regulatory side it needs an Article 11 technical-documentation pack and instructions-for-use for deployers, Article 27 FRIA guidance for its EU employer customers, an explicit statement of the human-oversight and override controls in the product, and ISO/IEC 42001 or an equivalent AI management-system policy added alongside its ISO 27001 certification. Finally, a public status page, a model and product changelog, and a named security disclosure contact would move post-market monitoring from a support inbox to a real public surface.
Regulatory frame
What applies to assessment AI.
Assessment is the most-regulated surface in AI hiring. NYC LL 144, EEOC and OFCCP frameworks, Illinois HB 3773, and EU AI Act Annex III §4 all apply, with overlap on bias-audit obligations.
Compare
Equalture against its nearest-scoring peers.
The closest scores in Assessment AI, side by side.
- Side-by-sideEqualture vs Testlify45F
- Side-by-sideEqualture vs Emmersion44F
- Side-by-sideEqualture vs Prevue HR44F
- Side-by-sideEqualture vs Retorio44F
Ranking
Others rated in Assessment AI
Ranked 48 of 82 by weighted total under rubric v1.0. The ordering is arithmetic on the rubric and carries no view on which tool suits a given hiring process.
- #45Testlify45F
- #46Clevry45F
- #47Cangrade45F
- #48EqualtureThis profile44F
- #49Emmersion44F
- #50Prevue HR44F
Conflicts of interest
No vendor pays for placement, scoring, or removal. Casework - the consulting firm that operates this directory - provides paid services to some vendors. Any active or recent (within 24 months) commercial relationship is disclosed on the affected vendor profile and the review is reassigned to an independent reviewer. See the full policy on About.
Casework has no commercial relationship with this vendor.