§ The result
Cegid leads Adaface on all 7 criteria.
Cegid scores 45 and Adaface 39 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Cegid is ahead of Adaface on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being FRIA Support at Adaface 30 to Cegid 32. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Adaface 38, Cegid 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 42% of the weighted advantage Cegid holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Cegid
Cegid's HR suite offers two recruiting lines: Cegid HR Talent Acquisition (ex-DigitalRecruiters), an ATS/CRM with CV parsing, scorecards, automated scoring and an AI conversational agent that pre-qualifies candidates on career sites and WhatsApp, and Cegid Talentsoft (now sold as Cegid HR Suite) recruiting, whose 'Recruiting Match' matches positions to candidates algorithmically.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Cegid 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 | Cegid |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | FR |
| Founded | 2018 | 1983 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Cegid 50
2.4 weighted points to Cegid
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Cegid 30
1.4 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Cegid 55
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Cegid 55
0.4 weighted points to Cegid
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Cegid 62
0.3 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Cegid 32
0.3 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Cegid 40
0.2 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Cegid.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Cegid | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 30 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 32 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 45 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | Adaface | Cegid | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 6 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 33 | 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; Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 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