§ The result
hackajob leads AmazingHiring by 8 points.
hackajob finishes 8 points ahead of AmazingHiring under rubric v1.0, 45 to 37, both scored as Sourcing entries. AmazingHiring takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for hackajob, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (AmazingHiring 35, hackajob 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 58% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
AmazingHiring
A technical-talent sourcing platform that aggregates public developer profiles from 50+ networks (GitHub, Stack Overflow, Kaggle, LinkedIn) and uses AI to rank and surface candidates for recruiters, with verified-contact retrieval and outreach automation.
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
AmazingHiring and hackajob are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only hackajob is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | AmazingHiring | hackajob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2011 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · hackajob 60
5.0 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · hackajob 58
1.2 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · hackajob 55
0.8 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · hackajob 60
0.6 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · hackajob 38
0.6 weighted points to hackajob
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · hackajob 20
0.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · hackajob 32
0.3 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 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 -8.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 32 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 38 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 45 (F) | -8 | -8.2 |
§ 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 | AmazingHiring | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 6 | 0 | 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 domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 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