Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Infor Talent Science
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
Infor Talent Science
Infor Talent Science is a cloud-based pre-hire behavioral and cognitive assessment platform. It scores candidates against patented machine-learning 'Performance Profiles' built from the behavior and performance data of an employer's successful incumbents, and gives hiring teams fit scores, recommendations and interview questions that are used to rank and route applicants.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
4 points separate Infor Talent Science and hackajob.
Infor Talent Science (Assessment) edges hackajob (Sourcing) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 49 to 45. hackajob and Infor Talent Science each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Infor Talent Science holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (hackajob 20, Infor Talent Science 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 75% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob3
- Infor Talent Science3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 42
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Infor Talent Science under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Infor Talent Science is in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2002 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight62% of the movement so far
hackajob20Infor Talent Science424.0 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
- 2
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight75% of the movement so far
hackajob38Infor Talent Science450.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight84% of the movement so far
hackajob55Infor Talent Science500.6 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
hackajob32Infor Talent Science350.4 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
- 5
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight98% of the movement so far
hackajob60Infor Talent Science580.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob58Infor Talent Science570.1 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Infor Talent Science, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 42 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 49F | -4 | -4.1 |
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 | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | 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; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Infor Talent Science 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.