§ The result
hackajob leads micro1 on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, hackajob, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 45 and micro1, filed under Screening, on 36, 9 points apart. micro1 is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: hackajob takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, hackajob 55 to micro1 48. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (hackajob 60, micro1 45) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (hackajob 60, micro1 50), the second being 22% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 6 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
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, micro1 under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only micro1 is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | hackajob | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 22% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
hackajob 60 · micro1 50
2.0 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
hackajob 58 · micro1 45
1.9 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
hackajob 38 · micro1 25
1.6 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
hackajob 32 · micro1 22
1.5 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
hackajob 60 · micro1 45
1.2 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
hackajob 55 · micro1 48
0.8 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +9.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 22 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 25 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 36 (F) | +9 | +9.0 |
§ 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 | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | 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 | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 8 | 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; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 75 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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.
§ Where next