§ The result
HackerEarth takes the total, Dover takes more of the criteria.
HackerEarth holds a 1-point edge over Dover under rubric v1.0, 46 to 45, across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Dover leads more of the criteria, 4 against 3 for HackerEarth, yet HackerEarth takes Article 11 Technical Documentation, which carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Dover 34, HackerEarth 55 — and at a 20% weight it carries 88% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Dover
Dover is an AI recruiting platform for startups offering a free applicant tracking system, candidate sourcing via a LinkedIn/Copilot browser extension, OpenAI/Anthropic-powered 0-100 applicant scoring, and a fractional-recruiter marketplace.
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
Dover is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, HackerEarth under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only HackerEarth is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Dover | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Dover 34 · HackerEarth 55
4.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Dover 52 · HackerEarth 35
3.1 weighted points to Dover
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Dover 30 · HackerEarth 32
0.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Dover 50 · HackerEarth 52
0.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Dover 58 · HackerEarth 56
0.2 weighted points to Dover
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Dover 44 · HackerEarth 42
0.2 weighted points to Dover
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Dover 60 · HackerEarth 57
0.2 weighted points to Dover
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Dover minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Dover | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 34 | 55 | -21 | -4.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 32 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 42 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 57 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 46 (F) | -1 | -1.0 |
§ 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 | Dover | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own 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 | 0 | 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 domainSources on a separate 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% | 13 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Dover has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 4 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 Dover sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Dover, across 3 distinct source domains, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Dover last reviewed
- July 17, 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