§ The result
Cangrade and hackajob tie at 45.
Cangrade, filed under Assessment, and hackajob, filed under Sourcing, tie at 45 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Cangrade leads 3 of the 7 criteria and hackajob 4, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 35, hackajob 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 91% of the weighted advantage Cangrade holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cangrade
Cangrade is a predictive pre-hire assessment and screening platform that scores candidates against customer-specific success models built from roughly 50 psychometric traits, with add-on modules for resume screening, structured and video interviews, interview scheduling, and reference checking.
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
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, hackajob under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Cangrade is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cangrade | hackajob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · hackajob 20
2.7 weighted points to Cangrade
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · hackajob 60
1.6 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · hackajob 38
0.7 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · hackajob 58
0.6 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · hackajob 32
0.3 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · hackajob 60
0.2 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · hackajob 55
0.1 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 32 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 58 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 45 (F) | - | -0.2 |
§ 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 | Cangrade | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 documented absences; hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cangrade sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 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