§ The result
3 points separate CoderPad and Adaface.
Under rubric v1.0, CoderPad and Adaface finish 3 points apart, 42 to 39, as two Assessment entries. Adaface takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 4 for CoderPad, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Adaface 38, CoderPad 45) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage CoderPad holds across the 4 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
CoderPad
CoderPad is a technical hiring platform that auto-scores and ranks candidates on coding assessments (Screen), uses an AI reviewer to evaluate and rank applicants' asynchronous video pre-screen responses against employer criteria (Qualify), and hosts live collaborative coding interviews with AI assistance, note-taking and summaries (Interview).
§ The record
Adaface and CoderPad are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Adaface | CoderPad |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · CoderPad 45
1.4 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · CoderPad 57
0.8 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · CoderPad 44
0.7 weighted points to CoderPad
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · CoderPad 20
0.4 weighted points to Adaface
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · CoderPad 28
0.3 weighted points to Adaface
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · CoderPad 54
0.3 weighted points to CoderPad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.9 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 -2.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus CoderPad.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | CoderPad | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 44 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 42 (F) | -3 | -2.6 |
§ 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 | CoderPad | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 32 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; CoderPad has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for CoderPad sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- CoderPad 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