§ The result
HackerEarth leads Entelo on all 7 criteria.
HackerEarth sits 13 points above Entelo under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 33 — with HackerEarth filed under Assessment and Entelo under Sourcing. HackerEarth leads every one of the 7 criteria, Entelo none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, Entelo 25 to HackerEarth 32. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Entelo 30, HackerEarth 55, 20% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Entelo
Entelo is an AI-powered talent sourcing and diversity-recruiting platform that aggregates hundreds of millions of public candidate profiles and applies predictive machine-learning models to score, rank, and surface (including underrepresented) candidates for recruiters.
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
Entelo 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, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only HackerEarth is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Entelo | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Entelo 30 · HackerEarth 55
5.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Entelo 20 · HackerEarth 35
2.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Entelo 42 · HackerEarth 56
1.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
8% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Entelo 40 · HackerEarth 57
1.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Entelo 25 · HackerEarth 32
1.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Entelo 45 · HackerEarth 52
1.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Entelo 35 · HackerEarth 42
0.8 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -13.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Entelo minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Entelo | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 55 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 35 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 56 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 57 | -17 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 46 (F) | -13 | -13.7 |
§ 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 | Entelo | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Entelo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 8 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Entelo, across 3 distinct source domains, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Entelo 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.
§ Where next