HomeCompareAdaface vs DevSkiller

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Adaface vs DevSkiller

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Adaface and DevSkiller tie at 39.

Adaface and DevSkiller, both in the Assessment cohort, tie at 39 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Adaface leads 2 of the 7 criteria and DevSkiller 2, with 3 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Adaface 30, DevSkiller 25 — and at a 15% weight it carries 56% of the weighted advantage Adaface holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Adaface and DevSkiller 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.

RecordAdafaceDevSkiller
Price tierLowMid
HeadquartersSGPL
Founded20182014

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 15% weight · 34% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Adaface 30 · DevSkiller 25

    0.8 weighted points to Adaface

  2. 20% weight · 62% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Adaface 38 · DevSkiller 35

    0.6 weighted points to Adaface

  3. 12% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Adaface 50 · DevSkiller 55

    0.6 weighted points to DevSkiller

  4. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Adaface 38 · DevSkiller 40

    0.2 weighted points to DevSkiller

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +0.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.5.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Adaface minus DevSkiller.

CategoryWeightAdafaceDevSkillerΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3835+3+0.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%2222--
FRIA Support15%3025+5+0.8
Data Governance Disclosure15%5252--
Human Oversight Design12%5055-5-0.6
Post-Market Monitoring12%3840-2-0.2
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%39 (F)39 (F)-+0.5

§ 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.

CriterionWeightAdafaceDevSkiller
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21—01—
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain30Audit reportSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on a separate domain
All criteria100%256Sources on the vendor's own domain114Audit reportSources on a separate domain

Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Adaface last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
DevSkiller last reviewed
July 17, 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.