§ The result
HackerEarth leads Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria.
HackerEarth sits 11 points above Aon Assessment under rubric v1.0, 46 against 35, with both filed under Assessment. HackerEarth is ahead of Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Aon Assessment 30 to HackerEarth 35. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Aon Assessment 25, HackerEarth 42) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Aon Assessment 40, HackerEarth 55), 27% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Aon Assessment
Aon Assessment Solutions (formerly cut-e) provides enterprise pre-hire psychometric assessments - ability, personality (ADEPT-15), situational-judgement, gamified cognitive (smartPredict/gridChallenge) tests and an AI-scored video interview tool (vidAssess-AI) - used to screen and rank job applicants at scale.
Vendor profile
HackerEarth
HackerEarth is a technical-hiring platform that auto-scores coding assessments under AI proctoring, runs FaceCode live coding interviews with AI-generated summaries, and offers OnScreen, an AI video-avatar interviewer that scores candidates against a fixed rubric.
§ The record
Aon Assessment and HackerEarth are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Aon Assessment | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2002 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · HackerEarth 55
3.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · HackerEarth 52
2.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · HackerEarth 42
2.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · HackerEarth 56
1.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · HackerEarth 32
1.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · HackerEarth 35
0.9 weighted points to HackerEarth
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · HackerEarth 57
0.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 56 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 57 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 46 (F) | -11 | -11.1 |
§ 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 | Aon Assessment | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Aon Assessment has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Aon Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HackerEarth 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