§ The result
hackajob leads DevSkiller by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, hackajob, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 45 and DevSkiller, filed under Assessment, on 39, 6 points apart. DevSkiller takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 4 for hackajob, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — DevSkiller 35, hackajob 60 — and at a 20% weight it carries 70% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
DevSkiller
DevSkiller (now branded SkillPanel) provides technical skills assessment and coding tests that automatically score developer candidates on real-world work-sample tasks using hidden verification unit tests and static code analysis.
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
DevSkiller 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, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only DevSkiller is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | DevSkiller | hackajob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | PL | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · hackajob 60
5.0 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
DevSkiller 25 · hackajob 32
1.1 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · hackajob 58
0.9 weighted points to hackajob
18% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · hackajob 20
0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · hackajob 38
0.2 weighted points to DevSkiller
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
DevSkiller 58 · hackajob 60
0.2 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 38 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 45 (F) | -6 | -6.5 |
§ 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 | DevSkiller | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 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 DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 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