§ The result
Sova Assessment leads Draup by 6 points.
Sova Assessment scores 48 and Draup 42 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Sova Assessment leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including FRIA Support, while Draup leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. FRIA Support is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Draup 25, Sova Assessment 40, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage Sova Assessment holds across the 5 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
Sova Assessment
Sova Assessment is a UK-based enterprise talent assessment platform combining personality questionnaires, cognitive and ability tests, situational judgement, video interviews, virtual assessment centres and AI-led role simulations into a single occupational-psychology-validated candidate scoring workflow.
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Sova Assessment under Assessment 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 Sova Assessment is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Draup | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 32% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · Sova Assessment 40
2.3 weighted points to Sova Assessment
12% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · Sova Assessment 40
1.4 weighted points to Sova Assessment
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Draup 48 · Sova Assessment 55
1.4 weighted points to Sova Assessment
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · Sova Assessment 38
0.9 weighted points to Sova Assessment
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · Sova Assessment 62
0.4 weighted points to Sova Assessment
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Draup 58 · Sova Assessment 55
0.4 weighted points to Draup
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · Sova Assessment 52
0.3 weighted points to Draup
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Draup minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Draup | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 38 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 40 | -15 | -2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 48 (F) | -6 | -5.7 |
§ 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 | Sova Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 8 | 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; Sova Assessment has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup and Sova Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sova Assessment last reviewed
- August 2, 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