§ The result
hackajob leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
hackajob sits 12 points above Emi under rubric v1.0 — 45 against 33 — with hackajob filed under Sourcing and Emi under Screening. Of the 7 criteria Emi wins none, and the narrowest lead hackajob holds is on Bias Audit Transparency, Emi 18 to hackajob 20. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Emi 28, hackajob 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 51% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Emi
Emi runs AI agents on WhatsApp, SMS and Messenger that screen and score frontline job applicants against employer-set criteria, schedule interviews, and collect hiring documents and check them against Mexican government databases.
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
Emi 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 | Emi | hackajob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · hackajob 60
6.4 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · hackajob 58
2.1 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · hackajob 55
1.3 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · hackajob 32
1.1 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · hackajob 60
1.0 weighted points to hackajob
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · hackajob 20
0.4 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · hackajob 38
0.4 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | Emi | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 60 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 20 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 58 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 45 (F) | -12 | -12.6 |
§ 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 | Emi | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 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 Emi sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 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