§ The result
Checkr leads hackajob on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Checkr scores 54 and hackajob 45 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. Checkr leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so hackajob is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Checkr leads is Data Governance Disclosure, Checkr 62 to hackajob 58. The advantage Checkr holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Checkr 35, hackajob 20, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 31% of the weighted points Checkr gains across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Checkr
Checkr is an FCRA-regulated background screening platform that uses machine learning to parse, classify and standardize criminal, employment, education and motor-vehicle records, and to route them through customer-configured adjudication rulesets that flag candidates as eligible, review or escalated for employment decisions.
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
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, hackajob under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Checkr | 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 · 31% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · hackajob 20
2.7 weighted points to Checkr
20% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · hackajob 60
2.0 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · hackajob 38
1.4 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · hackajob 55
1.3 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · hackajob 60
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · hackajob 58
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +8.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +8.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 60 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 45 (F) | +9 | +8.7 |
§ 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 | Checkr | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 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 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr 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