HomeCompareDraup vs hireEZ

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Draup vs hireEZ

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Draup and hireEZ tie at 42.

Draup and hireEZ tie at 42 under rubric v1.0 inside the Sourcing cohort, arriving there from different criteria. Draup leads 2 of the 7 criteria and hireEZ 3, with 2 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Draup 48, hireEZ 38 — and at a 20% weight it carries 79% of the weighted advantage Draup holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Draup and hireEZ are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.

RecordDrauphireEZ
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20172015

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 42% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Draup 48 · hireEZ 38

    2.0 weighted points to Draup

  2. 12% weight · 68% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Draup 28 · hireEZ 38

    1.2 weighted points to hireEZ

  3. 15% weight · 87% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Draup 54 · hireEZ 60

    0.9 weighted points to hireEZ

  4. 18% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Draup 33 · hireEZ 30

    0.5 weighted points to Draup

  5. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Draup 57 · hireEZ 58

    0.1 weighted points to hireEZ

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.4.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Draup minus hireEZ.

CategoryWeightDrauphireEZΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4838+10+2.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%3330+3+0.5
FRIA Support15%2525--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5460-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5858--
Post-Market Monitoring12%2838-10-1.2
Customer Documentation8%5758-1-0.1
Total100%42 (F)42 (F)-+0.4

§ 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.

CriterionWeightDrauphireEZ
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%41Sources on a separate domain11
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain01
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%237Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain95Sources on the vendor's own domain

Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; hireEZ has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for hireEZ, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Draup last reviewed
August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
hireEZ 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.