§ The result
Checkr leads ADP by 6 points.
Checkr scores 54 and ADP 48 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. Checkr leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while ADP leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — ADP 53, Checkr 70 — and at a 20% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
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.
Vendor profile
Checkr
Checkr is an FCRA-regulated background screening platform that uses machine learning to parse, classify and standardize criminal, employment, education and motor-vehicle records, and to route them through customer-configured adjudication rulesets that flag candidates as eligible, review or escalated for employment decisions.
§ The record
ADP is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Checkr under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | ADP | Checkr |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1949 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
ADP 53 · Checkr 70
3.4 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ADP 46 · Checkr 35
2.0 weighted points to ADP
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ADP 55 · Checkr 66
1.3 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
ADP 58 · Checkr 68
0.8 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
ADP 57 · Checkr 62
0.8 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
ADP 28 · Checkr 32
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ADP 45 · Checkr 50
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ADP minus Checkr.
| Category | Weight | ADP | Checkr | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 70 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 46 | 35 | +11 | +2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 32 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 66 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 68 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 54 (F) | -6 | -5.5 |
§ 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 | Checkr | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
ADP has 23 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for ADP, across 2 distinct source domains, and 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ADP last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Checkr 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