§ The result
HiPeople leads Adaface on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, HiPeople opens a 22-point lead on Adaface, 61 (D) to 39 (F), with both scored in the Assessment cohort. HiPeople leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Adaface leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Adaface 22, HiPeople 84) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 50% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 7 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
HiPeople
HiPeople is a Berlin-based hiring platform combining a 400+ test skills and personality assessment library, automated AI reference checks, AI resume/application screening that scores candidates against job criteria, and AI screening calls.
§ The record
Adaface and HiPeople 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 | HiPeople |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | DE |
| Founded | 2018 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · HiPeople 84
11.2 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · HiPeople 62
4.8 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · HiPeople 60
2.6 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · HiPeople 62
1.4 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · HiPeople 58
0.9 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · HiPeople 35
0.8 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · HiPeople 66
0.6 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -22.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -22 beside that -22.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus HiPeople.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | HiPeople | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 62 | -24 | -4.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 84 | -62 | -11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 60 | -22 | -2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 61 (D) | -22 | -22.3 |
§ 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 | HiPeople | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 8 | 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; HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiPeople sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiPeople 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