§ The result
Findem leads ADP by 10 points.
Findem sits 10 points above ADP under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 48 — with Findem filed under Sourcing and ADP under ATS-integrated. Findem leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while ADP leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — ADP 46, Findem 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 4 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
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
§ The record
ADP is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Findem under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | ADP | Findem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1949 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ADP 46 · Findem 83
6.7 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
ADP 28 · Findem 38
1.5 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
ADP 53 · Findem 58
1.0 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ADP 55 · Findem 60
0.6 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ADP 45 · Findem 42
0.4 weighted points to ADP
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -9.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -9.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ADP minus Findem.
| Category | Weight | ADP | Findem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 58 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 46 | 83 | -37 | -6.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 58 (F) | -10 | -9.4 |
§ 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 | Findem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
ADP has 23 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for ADP, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ADP last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Findem 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