Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Hogan Assessments
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.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
Hogan Assessments
Hogan Assessments provides science-based personality assessments - chiefly the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) - used to predict workplace performance for employee selection and development.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
2 points separate Hogan Assessments and hackajob.
Hogan Assessments holds a 2-point edge over hackajob under rubric v1.0, 47 to 45, across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of Hogan Assessments: Hogan Assessments is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and hackajob on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — hackajob 20, Hogan Assessments 44 — and at an 18% weight it carries 81% of the weighted advantage Hogan Assessments holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob3
- Hogan Assessments4
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 44
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Hogan Assessments under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Hogan Assessments is in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Hogan Assessments |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 1987 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight50% of the movement so far
hackajob20Hogan Assessments444.3 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight74% of the movement so far
hackajob60Hogan Assessments502.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight84% of the movement so far
hackajob58Hogan Assessments520.9 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
hackajob32Hogan Assessments360.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
hackajob55Hogan Assessments520.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight98% of the movement so far
hackajob38Hogan Assessments400.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob60Hogan Assessments620.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.1 — 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 -2 beside that -2.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Hogan Assessments, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Hogan Assessments | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 44 | -24 | -4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 36 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 47F | -2 | -2.1 |
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 | hackajob | Hogan Assessments | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 20 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Hogan Assessments last reviewed
- July 17, 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.