§ The result
Draup takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
Draup (Sourcing) edges Manatal (ATS-integrated) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 42 to 41. Manatal leads more of the criteria than Draup — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which Draup leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Draup. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Draup 48, Manatal 33 — and at a 20% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Draup holds across the 3 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
Manatal
Cloud-based applicant tracking system and recruitment CRM for agencies and HR teams, featuring an AI engine that scores and ranks candidates against job requirements and an asynchronous AI video Interviewer.
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Manatal under ATS-integrated 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 Manatal is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Draup | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | TH |
| Founded | 2017 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Draup 48 · Manatal 33
3.0 weighted points to Draup
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · Manatal 22
2.0 weighted points to Draup
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · Manatal 43
1.8 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · Manatal 33
1.2 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · Manatal 62
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · Manatal 52
0.3 weighted points to Draup
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Draup 58 · Manatal 60
0.2 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Draup minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | Draup | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 33 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 22 | +11 | +2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 33 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 43 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 41 (F) | +1 | +1.6 |
§ 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 | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Manatal 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