Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
ADP vs Arctic Shores
ADP
ADP is an enterprise human capital management and payroll provider whose recruiting suite uses AI to parse, rank, and match job applicants via its Candidate Relevancy tool, ADP Assist generative-AI assistant/job-description generator, and skills intelligence.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
Arctic Shores
Arctic Shores sells a task-based psychometric assessment platform ("Una") that scores candidates on behaviour captured during short interactive tasks - covering personality, workplace intelligence and learning agility - rather than self-report questionnaires or CV review.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
2 points separate ADP and Arctic Shores.
ADP holds a 2-point edge over Arctic Shores under rubric v1.0, 48 to 46, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to ADP and Arctic Shores, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side ADP holds, headed by Bias Audit Transparency, settle the total. ADP takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (ADP 46, Arctic Shores 35), which is 45% of the weighted advantage ADP holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Post-Market Monitoring, ADP 45 to Arctic Shores 30.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- ADP3
- Arctic Shores3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Post-Market Monitoring45 vs 30
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
ADP is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Arctic Shores under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Arctic Shores is in scope of
| Record | ADP | Arctic Shores |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1949 | 2013 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight33% of the movement so far
ADP46Arctic Shores352.0 weighted points to ADP
- 2
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight63% of the movement so far
ADP45Arctic Shores301.8 weighted points to ADP
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight80% of the movement so far
ADP28Arctic Shores351.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
- 4
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight90% of the movement so far
ADP53Arctic Shores500.6 weighted points to ADP
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight98% of the movement so far
ADP58Arctic Shores640.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
ADP55Arctic Shores560.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.0 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 +2.7.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ADP minus Arctic Shores, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | ADP | Arctic Shores | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 46 | 35 | +11 | +2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 48F | 46F | +2 | +2.7 |
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 | ADP | Arctic Shores | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
ADP has 23 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for ADP, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ADP last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Arctic Shores 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.