§ The result
Checkr leads Adaface on all 7 criteria.
Checkr finishes 15 points clear of Adaface under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 39 — across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Checkr takes all 7 criteria and Adaface none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Adaface 30 to Checkr 32. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Adaface 38, Checkr 70) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 44% of the weighted advantage Checkr 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
Checkr
Checkr is an FCRA-regulated background screening platform that uses machine learning to parse, classify and standardize criminal, employment, education and motor-vehicle records, and to route them through customer-configured adjudication rulesets that flag candidates as eligible, review or escalated for employment decisions.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Checkr under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | Checkr |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Checkr 70
6.4 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Checkr 35
2.3 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Checkr 66
1.9 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Checkr 62
1.5 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Checkr 50
1.4 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Checkr 68
0.8 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Checkr 32
0.3 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -14.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Checkr.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Checkr | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 70 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 35 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 32 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 66 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 68 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 54 (F) | -15 | -14.7 |
§ 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 | Checkr | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 2 | 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 | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 24 | 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; Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Checkr 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