HomeCompareDraup vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Draup vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

LinkedIn Recruiter leads Draup on all 7 criteria.

Under rubric v1.0, LinkedIn Recruiter opens a 15-point lead on Draup, 57 to 42, with both scored in the Sourcing cohort. LinkedIn Recruiter leads every one of the 7 criteria, Draup none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Draup 54 to LinkedIn Recruiter 62. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Draup 28, LinkedIn Recruiter 50) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Draup 48, LinkedIn Recruiter 67), the second being 26% of the weighted advantage LinkedIn Recruiter holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Draup and LinkedIn Recruiter 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.

RecordDraupLinkedIn Recruiter
Price tierEnterpriseEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20172002

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 26% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Draup 48 · LinkedIn Recruiter 67

    3.8 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  2. 18% weight · 47% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Draup 33 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    3.1 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  3. 12% weight · 66% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Draup 28 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    2.6 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  4. 15% weight · 79% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Draup 25 · LinkedIn Recruiter 38

    1.9 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  5. 15% weight · 87% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Draup 54 · LinkedIn Recruiter 62

    1.2 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  6. 12% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Draup 58 · LinkedIn Recruiter 66

    1.0 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  7. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Draup 57 · LinkedIn Recruiter 68

    0.9 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -14.5.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Draup minus LinkedIn Recruiter.

CategoryWeightDraupLinkedIn RecruiterΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4867-19-3.8
Bias Audit Transparency18%3350-17-3.1
FRIA Support15%2538-13-1.9
Data Governance Disclosure15%5462-8-1.2
Human Oversight Design12%5866-8-1.0
Post-Market Monitoring12%2850-22-2.6
Customer Documentation8%5768-11-0.9
Total100%42 (F)57 (F)-15-14.5

§ 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.

CriterionWeightDraupLinkedIn Recruiter
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%41Sources on a separate domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%237Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain345Audit 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; LinkedIn Recruiter has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup and LinkedIn Recruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 39 for LinkedIn Recruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.

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