Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Phenom
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
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
Phenom takes the total, hackajob takes more of the criteria.
Phenom finishes 7 points ahead of hackajob under rubric v1.0, 52 to 45, both scored as Sourcing entries. hackajob leads more of the criteria, 4 against 3 for Phenom, yet Phenom takes Bias Audit Transparency, which carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — hackajob 20, Phenom 75 — and at an 18% weight it carries 92% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob4
- Phenom3
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 75
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob and Phenom are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2010 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight70% of the movement so far
hackajob20Phenom759.9 weighted points to Phenom
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight77% of the movement so far
hackajob32Phenom251.1 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight84% of the movement so far
hackajob60Phenom551.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight91% of the movement so far
hackajob38Phenom301.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
hackajob55Phenom600.6 weighted points to Phenom
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight98% of the movement so far
hackajob60Phenom550.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 7
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob58Phenom600.3 weighted points to Phenom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Phenom, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 75 | -55 | -9.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 52F | -7 | -7.4 |
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 | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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
Scored against