§ The result
Ashby leads Adaface on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Ashby (ATS-integrated) opens a 17-point lead on Adaface (Assessment), 56 to 39. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria, Adaface none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Adaface 38 to Ashby 42. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Adaface 22, Ashby 62 — and at an 18% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Adaface
Adaface runs chatbot-led 'conversational' skills tests for 500+ roles that score candidates automatically as pass, borderline pass or fail on benchmarked scorecards, backed by webcam, screen and IP proctoring and an AI résumé parser.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Ashby under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Adaface is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Adaface | Ashby |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Ashby 62
7.2 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Ashby 63
5.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Ashby 42
1.8 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Ashby 62
1.4 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Ashby 58
0.9 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Ashby 42
0.5 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Ashby 63
0.4 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -17 beside that -17.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Ashby.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Ashby | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 63 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 62 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 63 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 56 (F) | -17 | -17.2 |
§ 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 | Adaface | Ashby | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Ashby 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