§ The result
2 points separate Xobin and ADP.
Xobin (Assessment) edges ADP (ATS-integrated) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 50 to 48. Xobin leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while ADP leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (ADP 53, Xobin 62) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 53% of the weighted advantage Xobin holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
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
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
§ The record
ADP is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Xobin under Assessment 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. Only Xobin is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | ADP | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 1949 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
ADP 53 · Xobin 62
1.8 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 60% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
ADP 28 · Xobin 35
1.1 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ADP 45 · Xobin 38
0.8 weighted points to ADP
18% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ADP 46 · Xobin 43
0.5 weighted points to ADP
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ADP 55 · Xobin 58
0.4 weighted points to Xobin
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
ADP 58 · Xobin 60
0.2 weighted points to Xobin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.8 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 -2.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ADP minus Xobin.
| Category | Weight | ADP | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 62 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 46 | 43 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 50 (F) | -2 | -2.0 |
§ 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 | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | Sources 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; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for ADP, across 2 distinct source domains, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ADP last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin last reviewed
- September 25, 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