§ The result
4 points separate Lever and hackajob.
Lever (ATS-integrated) edges hackajob (Sourcing) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 49 to 45. Lever leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while hackajob leads 2, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 2 are level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (hackajob 20, Lever 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 73% of the weighted advantage Lever holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
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
Lever
Lever is an AI-powered applicant tracking system and recruiting CRM that centralizes sourcing, candidate relationship management, AI candidate matching (Talent Fit), and hiring analytics for high-growth employers.
§ The record
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Lever under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | hackajob | Lever |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
hackajob 20 · Lever 42
4.0 weighted points to Lever
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
hackajob 60 · Lever 52
1.6 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
hackajob 38 · Lever 45
0.8 weighted points to Lever
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
hackajob 55 · Lever 60
0.6 weighted points to Lever
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
hackajob 60 · Lever 58
0.2 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 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 -3.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Lever.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Lever | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 42 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 49 (F) | -4 | -3.6 |
§ 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 | Lever | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Lever has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Lever sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Lever, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Lever 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