Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Interviewer.AI
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
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.
Substantial gaps
Video interview
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.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob3
- Interviewer.AI4
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 35
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
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
Only Interviewer.AI is in scope of
| 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.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight41% of the movement so far
hackajob20Interviewer.AI352.7 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight66% of the movement so far
hackajob60Interviewer.AI521.6 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight77% of the movement so far
hackajob38Interviewer.AI320.7 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight86% of the movement so far
hackajob55Interviewer.AI600.6 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight93% of the movement so far
hackajob32Interviewer.AI350.4 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight98% of the movement so far
hackajob58Interviewer.AI600.3 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob60Interviewer.AI580.2 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, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| 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% | 45F | 47F | -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.