§ The result
Greenhouse leads HackerRank on all 7 criteria.
Greenhouse sits 12 points above HackerRank under rubric v1.0 — 67 (D) against 55 (F) — with Greenhouse filed under ATS-integrated and HackerRank under Assessment. Greenhouse is ahead of HackerRank on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Customer Documentation at Greenhouse 64 to HackerRank 62. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Greenhouse 78, HackerRank 60, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 31% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
Vendor profile
HackerRank
HackerRank is a technical skills assessment platform for developer hiring that uses coding tests, interviews, and AI-based features (question generation, ML plagiarism/AI-code detection, and image-analysis proctoring) to evaluate candidates.
§ The record
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HackerRank under Assessment 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. Only HackerRank is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Greenhouse | HackerRank |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2009 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · HackerRank 60
3.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · HackerRank 68
3.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · HackerRank 45
1.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · HackerRank 55
1.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · HackerRank 35
1.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · HackerRank 60
0.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · HackerRank 62
0.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.7 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 +11.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus HackerRank.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | HackerRank | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 60 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 68 | +18 | +3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 55 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 60 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 62 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 55 (F) | +12 | +11.7 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | HackerRank | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; HackerRank has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and HackerRank sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HackerRank last reviewed
- June 7, 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