§ The result
3 points separate Draup and Adaface.
Draup (Sourcing) edges Adaface (Assessment) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 42 to 39. Draup leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Adaface leads 3, including Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap (Adaface 22, Draup 33) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Adaface 38, Draup 48), 38% of the weighted advantage Draup builds 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
Draup
Draup is an AI-powered talent- and sales-intelligence platform that aggregates over a billion public professional profiles into skills, roles and labour-market analytics, and surfaces ranked candidate shortlists for enterprise workforce planning and recruiting.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Draup under Candidate sourcing 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 | Draup |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Draup 48
2.0 weighted points to Draup
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Draup 33
2.0 weighted points to Draup
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Draup 28
1.2 weighted points to Adaface
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Draup 58
1.0 weighted points to Draup
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Draup 25
0.8 weighted points to Adaface
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Draup 54
0.3 weighted points to Draup
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Draup 57
0.1 weighted points to Adaface
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 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 -3.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Draup.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Draup | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 33 | -11 | -2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 28 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 42 (F) | -3 | -3.2 |
§ 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 | Draup | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 23 | 7 | 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; Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Draup 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