Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Pinpoint
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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
Pinpoint leads hackajob on all 7 criteria.
Pinpoint, filed under Screening, comes out 12 points above hackajob, filed under Sourcing: 57 against 45 under rubric v1.0. Pinpoint leads every one of the 7 criteria, hackajob none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, hackajob 32 to Pinpoint 38. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (hackajob 20, Pinpoint 42, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob0
- Pinpoint7
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 42
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Pinpoint under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | JE |
| Founded | 2014 | 2017 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight33% of the movement so far
hackajob20Pinpoint424.0 weighted points to Pinpoint
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight53% of the movement so far
hackajob60Pinpoint722.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight67% of the movement so far
hackajob38Pinpoint521.7 weighted points to Pinpoint
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight80% of the movement so far
hackajob58Pinpoint681.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight89% of the movement so far
hackajob55Pinpoint641.1 weighted points to Pinpoint
- 6
FRIA Support
15% weight96% of the movement so far
hackajob32Pinpoint380.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob60Pinpoint660.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Pinpoint, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 72 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 42 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 68 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 64 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 66 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 57F | -12 | -12.0 |
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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint last reviewed
- July 17, 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.