Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Humanly
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
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
3 points separate hackajob and Humanly.
hackajob (Sourcing) edges Humanly (Screening) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 45 to 42. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of hackajob: hackajob is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Humanly on Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing are the same criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, and Humanly holds it (hackajob 20, Humanly 40, 18% weight), worth 82% of the weighted advantage Humanly builds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob4
- Humanly3
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 40
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Humanly under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Humanly is in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Humanly |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2018 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight31% of the movement so far
hackajob20Humanly403.6 weighted points to Humanly
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight56% of the movement so far
hackajob60Humanly453.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight79% of the movement so far
hackajob58Humanly402.7 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight88% of the movement so far
hackajob38Humanly301.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight93% of the movement so far
hackajob60Humanly520.6 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
FRIA Support
15% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob32Humanly350.4 weighted points to Humanly
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob55Humanly580.4 weighted points to Humanly
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.9 — 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 +3 beside that +2.9.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Humanly, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Humanly | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 40 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 42F | +3 | +2.9 |
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 | Humanly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 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; Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 18 for Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Humanly 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.