§ The result
Xobin leads Draup on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Xobin, filed under Assessment, finishes on 50 and Draup, filed under Sourcing, on 42, 8 points apart. Draup is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Xobin takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Data Governance Disclosure, Draup 54 to Xobin 57. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Draup 48, Xobin 62, 20% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage Xobin builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
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
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
§ The record
Draup is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Xobin 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 Xobin is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Draup | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| 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 · Xobin 62
2.8 weighted points to Xobin
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Draup 33 · Xobin 43
1.8 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Draup 25 · Xobin 35
1.5 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Draup 28 · Xobin 38
1.2 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Draup 54 · Xobin 57
0.4 weighted points to Xobin
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Draup 57 · Xobin 60
0.2 weighted points to Xobin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -8.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Draup minus Xobin.
| Category | Weight | Draup | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 33 | 43 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 57 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 50 (F) | -8 | -8.0 |
§ 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 | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 5 | Sources 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; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup and Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin last reviewed
- September 25, 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