§ The result
2 points separate Draup and Pillar.
Draup (Sourcing) edges Pillar (Screening) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 42 to 40. Draup leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Pillar leads 3, including Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Draup 58, Pillar 48) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Draup 54, Pillar 45), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Draup holds across the 4 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
Pillar
Pillar (now "AI Interview Companion by Employ") is an interview intelligence platform that records and transcribes job interviews, generates AI interview guides and highlight clips, and surfaces candidate insights and interviewer-coaching recommendations.
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Pillar under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Pillar is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Draup | Pillar |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 21% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · Pillar 45
1.3 weighted points to Draup
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Draup 48 · Pillar 42
1.2 weighted points to Draup
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Draup 58 · Pillar 48
1.2 weighted points to Draup
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · Pillar 38
0.9 weighted points to Pillar
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · Pillar 30
0.8 weighted points to Pillar
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · Pillar 33
0.6 weighted points to Pillar
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · Pillar 50
0.6 weighted points to Draup
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +2.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Draup minus Pillar.
| Category | Weight | Draup | Pillar | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 38 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 45 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 33 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 40 (F) | +2 | +2.1 |
§ 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 | Pillar | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Pillar has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 7 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 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Pillar, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pillar 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.
§ Where next