§ The result
Sense leads Draup on all 7 criteria.
Sense finishes 16 points clear of Draup under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 42 — across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. Sense leads every one of the 7 criteria, Draup none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Draup 54 to Sense 58. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Draup 33, Sense 72 — and at an 18% weight it carries 44% of the weighted advantage Sense 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
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Sense 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.
| Record | Draup | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · Sense 72
7.0 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · Sense 52
2.9 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Draup 48 · Sense 60
2.4 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · Sense 38
1.9 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Draup 58 · Sense 64
0.7 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · Sense 58
0.6 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · Sense 62
0.4 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -16.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -16 beside that -16.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Draup minus Sense.
| Category | Weight | Draup | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 72 | -39 | -7.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 58 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 52 | -24 | -2.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 58 (F) | -16 | -16.0 |
§ 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 | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 3 | 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; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup and Sense 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 Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sense 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