§ The result
Rippling leads Draup on all 7 criteria.
Rippling sits 14 points above Draup under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 42 — with Rippling filed under ATS-integrated and Draup under Sourcing. Rippling leads every one of the 7 criteria, Draup none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Draup 58 to Rippling 60. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Draup 48, Rippling 73, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage Rippling 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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Draup is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Draup | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Draup 48 · Rippling 73
5.0 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · Rippling 45
3.0 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · Rippling 47
2.3 weighted points to Rippling
18% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · Rippling 42
1.6 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · Rippling 64
1.5 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · Rippling 64
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Draup 58 · Rippling 60
0.2 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 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 -14.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Draup minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | Draup | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 73 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 42 | -9 | -1.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 45 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 64 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 47 | -19 | -2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 64 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 56 (F) | -14 | -14.2 |
§ 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 | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | 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 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 1 | 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; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; 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 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling 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