§ The result
Crosschq leads Adaface on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Crosschq scores 47 and Adaface 39 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Crosschq leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Adaface is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Crosschq leads is Post-Market Monitoring, Adaface 38 to Crosschq 40. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Adaface 22, Crosschq 38, 18% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage Crosschq builds across the 6 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
Crosschq
Crosschq is a hiring-intelligence platform that combines automated 360 reference checks, an AI Interview Agent that conducts and scores voice/video screening interviews, AI resume matching and ranking, candidate-fraud and identity checks, Traitify personality and cognitive assessments, and quality-of-hire analytics.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Crosschq under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Adaface | Crosschq |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Crosschq 38
2.9 weighted points to Crosschq
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Crosschq 50
2.4 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Crosschq 62
1.4 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Crosschq 58
0.9 weighted points to Crosschq
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Crosschq 62
0.3 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Crosschq 40
0.2 weighted points to Crosschq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -8.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Crosschq.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Crosschq | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 38 | -16 | -2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 47 (F) | -8 | -8.2 |
§ 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 | Crosschq | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 38 | 5 | 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; Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Crosschq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 74 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Crosschq 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