Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Adaface vs Feenyx
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
Feenyx
Feenyx (formerly Filtered.ai) is a skills-assessment and interview platform that runs AI-scored asynchronous coding, video and written assessments and AI-assisted live interviews, with resume scoring, candidate matching, identity verification and fraud/AI-use detection.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
1 point separates Feenyx and Adaface.
Feenyx holds a 1-point edge over Adaface under rubric v1.0, 40 to 39, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to Adaface and Feenyx, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Feenyx holds, headed by Human Oversight Design, settle the total. Human Oversight Design is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Adaface 50, Feenyx 58 — and at a 12% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Feenyx holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Adaface3
- Feenyx3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Human Oversight Design50 vs 58
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Human Oversight Design12% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Adaface and Feenyx are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Adaface | Feenyx |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2016 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Human Oversight Design
12% weight27% of the movement so far
Adaface50Feenyx581.0 weighted points to Feenyx
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight49% of the movement so far
Adaface38Feenyx420.8 weighted points to Feenyx
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight70% of the movement so far
Adaface30Feenyx250.8 weighted points to Adaface
- 4
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight85% of the movement so far
Adaface22Feenyx250.5 weighted points to Feenyx
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight93% of the movement so far
Adaface52Feenyx500.3 weighted points to Adaface
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Adaface58Feenyx550.2 weighted points to Adaface
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Feenyx, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Feenyx | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 38 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39F | 40F | -1 | -1.0 |
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 | Feenyx | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources 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 | 8 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 5 | Audit reportSources 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; Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Feenyx sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Feenyx 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
Scored against