§ The result
4 points separate Draup and Alooba.
Draup holds a 4-point edge over Alooba under rubric v1.0, 42 to 38, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Draup leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Alooba leads 3, including Post-Market Monitoring. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Alooba 22, Draup 33, 18% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage Draup builds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Alooba
Alooba sells online skills assessments (auto-graded SQL, Python/R, multiple-choice and data-analysis tests, plus manually graded free-response and one-way video questions) that employers use to screen, benchmark and optionally auto-reject job candidates.
Vendor profile
Draup
Draup is an AI-powered talent- and sales-intelligence platform that aggregates over a billion public professional profiles into skills, roles and labour-market analytics, and surfaces ranked candidate shortlists for enterprise workforce planning and recruiting.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Draup under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Alooba is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | Draup |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Draup 33
2.0 weighted points to Draup
20% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Draup 48
1.6 weighted points to Draup
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Draup 54
1.3 weighted points to Draup
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Draup 28
1.0 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Draup 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Draup 58
0.4 weighted points to Draup
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Draup 57
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Draup.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Draup | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 48 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 33 | -11 | -2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 54 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 28 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 42 (F) | -4 | -3.8 |
§ 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 | Alooba | Draup | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and Draup sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Draup 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