§ The result
iMocha leads Draup on all 7 criteria.
iMocha sits 14 points above Draup under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 42 — with iMocha filed under Assessment and Draup under Sourcing. iMocha leads every one of the 7 criteria, Draup none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Draup 58 to iMocha 64. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Draup 48, iMocha 68, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage iMocha holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, iMocha under Assessment 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. Only iMocha is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Draup | iMocha |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2017 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Draup 48 · iMocha 68
4.0 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · iMocha 48
2.4 weighted points to iMocha
18% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · iMocha 44
2.0 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · iMocha 38
1.9 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · iMocha 66
1.8 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Draup 58 · iMocha 64
0.7 weighted points to iMocha
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · iMocha 66
0.7 weighted points to iMocha
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 13.6 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 Draup minus iMocha.
| Category | Weight | Draup | iMocha | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 68 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 44 | -11 | -2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 66 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 48 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 66 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 56 (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 | Draup | iMocha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 21 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup and iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iMocha 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