§ The result
HackerRank leads Alooba on all 7 criteria.
The Assessment cohort pairing of HackerRank and Alooba comes out 55 to 38 under rubric v1.0, a 17-point lead for HackerRank. HackerRank takes all 7 criteria and Alooba none of them; the nearest contest is Customer Documentation, Alooba 58 to HackerRank 62. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alooba 22, HackerRank 68 — and at an 18% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
HackerRank
HackerRank is a technical skills assessment platform for developer hiring that uses coding tests, interviews, and AI-based features (question generation, ML plagiarism/AI-code detection, and image-analysis proctoring) to evaluate candidates.
§ The record
Alooba and HackerRank are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | HackerRank |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2009 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · HackerRank 68
8.3 weighted points to HackerRank
20% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · HackerRank 60
4.0 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · HackerRank 55
1.5 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · HackerRank 45
1.1 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · HackerRank 35
1.1 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · HackerRank 60
0.6 weighted points to HackerRank
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · HackerRank 62
0.3 weighted points to HackerRank
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -16.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -17 beside that -16.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus HackerRank.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | HackerRank | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 68 | -46 | -8.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 45 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 55 (F) | -17 | -16.8 |
§ 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 | HackerRank | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; HackerRank has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba and HackerRank sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HackerRank 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