§ The result
2 points separate Interviewer.AI and hackajob.
Interviewer.AI holds a 2-point edge over hackajob under rubric v1.0, 47 to 45, across the Video interview and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of Interviewer.AI: Interviewer.AI 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, Interviewer.AI 35 — and at an 18% weight it carries 67% of the weighted advantage Interviewer.AI holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
§ The record
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Interviewer.AI under Video interview AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Interviewer.AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | hackajob | Interviewer.AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SG |
| Founded | 2014 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
hackajob 20 · Interviewer.AI 35
2.7 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
hackajob 60 · Interviewer.AI 52
1.6 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
hackajob 38 · Interviewer.AI 32
0.7 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
hackajob 55 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.6 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
hackajob 32 · Interviewer.AI 35
0.4 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
hackajob 58 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.3 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
hackajob 60 · Interviewer.AI 58
0.2 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.5 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 -1.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Interviewer.AI.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Interviewer.AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 35 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 47 (F) | -2 | -1.6 |
§ 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 | hackajob | Interviewer.AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 3 | 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; Interviewer.AI 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 Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Interviewer.AI 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