§ The result
BrightHire leads HackerEarth by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, BrightHire, filed under Screening, finishes on 51 and HackerEarth, filed under Assessment, on 46, 5 points apart. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of BrightHire, with 1 level: BrightHire is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HackerEarth on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — BrightHire 50, HackerEarth 35 — and at an 18% weight it carries 50% of the weighted advantage BrightHire holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
BrightHire
BrightHire is an interview intelligence platform that records, transcribes and analyzes hiring interviews into competency-structured notes and ATS scorecards, and additionally runs AI-led screening interviews (BrightHire Screen) that score and rank candidates against customer-defined rubrics.
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
BrightHire is filed under Screening AI, HackerEarth under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | BrightHire | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
BrightHire 50 · HackerEarth 35
2.7 weighted points to BrightHire
15% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
BrightHire 60 · HackerEarth 52
1.2 weighted points to BrightHire
20% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
BrightHire 52 · HackerEarth 55
0.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
BrightHire 36 · HackerEarth 32
0.6 weighted points to BrightHire
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
BrightHire 60 · HackerEarth 56
0.5 weighted points to BrightHire
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
BrightHire 62 · HackerEarth 57
0.4 weighted points to BrightHire
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +4.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is BrightHire minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | BrightHire | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 35 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 36 | 32 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 57 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 51 (F) | 46 (F) | +5 | +4.8 |
§ 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 | BrightHire | 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% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
BrightHire has 23 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for BrightHire, across 2 distinct source domains, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- BrightHire last reviewed
- August 2, 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