§ The result
Oleeo takes the total, Adaface takes more of the criteria.
Oleeo (ATS-integrated) edges Adaface (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 40 to 39. Adaface leads more of the criteria than Oleeo — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Oleeo leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Oleeo. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Adaface 22, Oleeo 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 76% of the weighted advantage Oleeo holds across the 3 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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Oleeo under ATS-integrated 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 | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Oleeo 40
3.2 weighted points to Oleeo
15% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Oleeo 45
1.1 weighted points to Adaface
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Oleeo 30
1.0 weighted points to Adaface
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Oleeo 25
0.8 weighted points to Adaface
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Oleeo 55
0.6 weighted points to Oleeo
20% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Oleeo 40
0.4 weighted points to Oleeo
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Oleeo 55
0.2 weighted points to Adaface
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 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 -1.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 40 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 40 (F) | -1 | -1.2 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo last reviewed
- June 7, 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