HomeCompareAdaface vs Paylocity

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Adaface vs Paylocity

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Paylocity leads Adaface on 4 of the 7 criteria.

Paylocity (ATS-integrated) edges Adaface (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 43 to 39. Paylocity leads 4 of the 7 criteria and the remaining 3 are level, so Adaface is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 4 Paylocity leads is Data Governance Disclosure, Adaface 52 to Paylocity 54. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Adaface 22, Paylocity 33) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 50% of the weighted advantage Paylocity holds across the 4 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Paylocity 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, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordAdafacePaylocity
Price tierLowMid
HeadquartersSGUS
Founded20181997

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 50% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Adaface 22 · Paylocity 33

    2.0 weighted points to Paylocity

  2. 20% weight · 80% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Adaface 38 · Paylocity 44

    1.2 weighted points to Paylocity

  3. 12% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Adaface 38 · Paylocity 42

    0.5 weighted points to Paylocity

  4. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Adaface 52 · Paylocity 54

    0.3 weighted points to Paylocity

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to -4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.0.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Adaface minus Paylocity.

CategoryWeightAdafacePaylocityΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3844-6-1.2
Bias Audit Transparency18%2233-11-2.0
FRIA Support15%3030--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5254-2-0.3
Human Oversight Design12%5050--
Post-Market Monitoring12%3842-4-0.5
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%39 (F)43 (F)-4-4.0

§ 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.

CriterionWeightAdafacePaylocity
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21—11—
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%256Sources on the vendor's own domain117Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Adaface has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Paylocity has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Paylocity, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Adaface last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Paylocity 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.