§ The result
HackerEarth leads Canditech by 7 points.
Inside the Assessment cohort, rubric v1.0 puts HackerEarth on 46 and Canditech on 39, 7 points apart. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of HackerEarth, with 1 level: HackerEarth is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Canditech on Customer Documentation. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Canditech 37, HackerEarth 55) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 50% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Canditech
Canditech is a skills-assessment and job-simulation platform that screens candidates with work-sample tests, technical and soft-skill assessments, and one-way video interviews, using AI agents to auto-score open-text and video responses.
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
Canditech 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 | Canditech | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IL | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Canditech 37 · HackerEarth 55
3.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Canditech 25 · HackerEarth 35
1.8 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Canditech 32 · HackerEarth 42
1.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Canditech 53 · HackerEarth 56
0.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Canditech 30 · HackerEarth 32
0.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Canditech 58 · HackerEarth 57
0.1 weighted points to Canditech
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -7.2 — 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 -7.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Canditech minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Canditech | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 37 | 55 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 32 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 56 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 46 (F) | -7 | -7.2 |
§ 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 | Canditech | 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 | — | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 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% | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Canditech has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 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 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Canditech last reviewed
- July 17, 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