§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads HackerEarth by 10 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 10 points above HackerEarth, filed under Assessment: 56 against 46 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Cornerstone OnDemand: Cornerstone OnDemand is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HackerEarth on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cornerstone OnDemand 58, HackerEarth 35 — and at an 18% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
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
Cornerstone OnDemand is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HackerEarth under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1999 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · HackerEarth 35
4.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · HackerEarth 55
3.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · HackerEarth 52
1.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · HackerEarth 32
0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · HackerEarth 42
0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · HackerEarth 57
0.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · HackerEarth 56
0.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 55 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 35 | +23 | +4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 32 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 57 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 46 (F) | +10 | +9.7 |
§ 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 | Cornerstone OnDemand | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 domainSources 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 | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 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 Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand 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.