§ The result
Dayforce leads HackerEarth on all 7 criteria.
Dayforce sits 11 points above HackerEarth under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 46 — with Dayforce filed under ATS-integrated and HackerEarth under Assessment. Dayforce is ahead of HackerEarth on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Post-Market Monitoring at Dayforce 47 to HackerEarth 42. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Dayforce 74, HackerEarth 55, 20% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage Dayforce builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Dayforce
Dayforce is an enterprise human capital management platform whose Dayforce Recruiting module uses AI to assign letter grades to external job applicants, generate job descriptions, and automate screening and hiring workflows alongside HR, payroll, time, talent, and analytics.
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
Dayforce 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 and Illinois HB 3773. Only HackerEarth is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Dayforce | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1992 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Dayforce 74 · HackerEarth 55
3.8 weighted points to Dayforce
15% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Dayforce 63 · HackerEarth 52
1.6 weighted points to Dayforce
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Dayforce 68 · HackerEarth 56
1.4 weighted points to Dayforce
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Dayforce 42 · HackerEarth 35
1.3 weighted points to Dayforce
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Dayforce 40 · HackerEarth 32
1.2 weighted points to Dayforce
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Dayforce 70 · HackerEarth 57
1.0 weighted points to Dayforce
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Dayforce 47 · HackerEarth 42
0.6 weighted points to Dayforce
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +11.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Dayforce minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Dayforce | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 74 | 55 | +19 | +3.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 40 | 32 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 68 | 56 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 42 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 70 | 57 | +13 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 46 (F) | +11 | +11.0 |
§ 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 | Dayforce | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Dayforce has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 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 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Dayforce, across 1 distinct source domain, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Dayforce 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