§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Draup by 14 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand sits 14 points above Draup under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 42 — with Cornerstone OnDemand filed under ATS-integrated and Draup under Sourcing. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Draup leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Cornerstone OnDemand 58, Draup 33) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cornerstone OnDemand 72, Draup 48), the second being 34% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
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
Cornerstone OnDemand is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Draup under Candidate sourcing 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. Only Cornerstone OnDemand is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | Draup |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1999 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Draup 48
4.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Draup 33
4.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Draup 28
2.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Draup 25
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Draup 54
0.9 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Draup 58
0.4 weighted points to Draup
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Draup 57
0.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +13.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +13.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Draup.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Draup | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 48 | +24 | +4.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 33 | +25 | +4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 28 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 57 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 42 (F) | +14 | +13.6 |
§ 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 | Cornerstone OnDemand | Draup | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 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 Cornerstone OnDemand and Draup sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 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