Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
ADP vs Teamtailor
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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
1 point separates ADP and Teamtailor.
ADP holds a 1-point edge over Teamtailor under rubric v1.0, 48 to 47, with both scored in the ATS-integrated cohort. Teamtailor takes 3 of the 7 criteria, FRIA Support among them, against 4 for ADP, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (ADP 46, Teamtailor 30) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 73% of the weighted advantage ADP holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- ADP4
- Teamtailor3
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency46 vs 30
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
ADP and Teamtailor are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | ADP | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 1949 | 2013 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight44% of the movement so far
ADP46Teamtailor302.9 weighted points to ADP
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight76% of the movement so far
ADP28Teamtailor422.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight85% of the movement so far
ADP53Teamtailor500.6 weighted points to ADP
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight91% of the movement so far
ADP45Teamtailor420.4 weighted points to ADP
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight96% of the movement so far
ADP58Teamtailor620.3 weighted points to Teamtailor
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight98% of the movement so far
ADP57Teamtailor580.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
ADP55Teamtailor540.1 weighted points to ADP
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ADP minus Teamtailor, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | ADP | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 46 | 30 | +16 | +2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 42 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 48F | 47F | +1 | +1.4 |
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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 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; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for ADP, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ADP last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor 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.
Where next
Scored against