§ The result
2 points separate Radancy and Adaface.
Radancy (Sourcing) edges Adaface (Assessment) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 41 to 39. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of Radancy: Radancy is ahead on Data Governance Disclosure and Adaface on Bias Audit Transparency. Human Oversight Design is the widest raw gap (Adaface 50, Radancy 57) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Adaface 52, Radancy 58), 33% of the weighted advantage Radancy 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
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
Adaface is filed under Assessment AI, Radancy 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, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Adaface | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Adaface 52 · Radancy 58
0.9 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Adaface 50 · Radancy 57
0.8 weighted points to Radancy
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Adaface 38 · Radancy 42
0.8 weighted points to Radancy
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Adaface 22 · Radancy 20
0.4 weighted points to Adaface
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Adaface 30 · Radancy 28
0.3 weighted points to Adaface
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Adaface 38 · Radancy 36
0.2 weighted points to Adaface
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Adaface 58 · Radancy 60
0.2 weighted points to Radancy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.8 — 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 -2 beside that -1.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Adaface minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Adaface | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 36 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 41 (F) | -2 | -1.8 |
§ 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 | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 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; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Adaface, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Adaface last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy 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