§ The result
Findem leads hackajob by 13 points.
Findem sits 13 points above hackajob under rubric v1.0, 58 against 45, with both filed under Sourcing. Findem leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while hackajob leads 3, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Findem 83, hackajob 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 85% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
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
Findem and hackajob are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Findem | hackajob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Findem 83 · hackajob 20
11.3 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Findem 38 · hackajob 32
0.9 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Findem 60 · hackajob 55
0.6 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Findem 42 · hackajob 38
0.5 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Findem 58 · hackajob 60
0.4 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Findem 58 · hackajob 60
0.2 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Findem 57 · hackajob 58
0.1 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 14.0 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 +12.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Findem minus hackajob.
| Category | Weight | Findem | hackajob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 20 | +63 | +11.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 45 (F) | +13 | +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 | Findem | hackajob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 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 Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains, and 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Findem last reviewed
- June 7, 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