§ The result
hackajob leads Alooba by 7 points.
hackajob scores 45 and Alooba 38 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Alooba takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for hackajob, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 40, hackajob 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 58% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Alooba
Alooba sells online skills assessments (auto-graded SQL, Python/R, multiple-choice and data-analysis tests, plus manually graded free-response and one-way video questions) that employers use to screen, benchmark and optionally auto-reject job candidates.
Vendor profile
hackajob
Archer, hackajob's AI sourcing agent, is calibrated by a recruiter on a hiring brief, then finds, engages and qualifies passive candidates from a 1.5m-member pool and 800m+ indexed profiles and invites those who meet the bar to apply through the employer's existing ATS.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, hackajob under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Alooba is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | hackajob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · hackajob 60
4.0 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · hackajob 58
1.9 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · hackajob 32
0.6 weighted points to hackajob
18% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · hackajob 20
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · hackajob 38
0.2 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · hackajob 60
0.2 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 32 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 38 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 45 (F) | -7 | -6.6 |
§ 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 | Alooba | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- hackajob 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