Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs SEEK
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
SEEK
SEEK runs employment marketplaces in Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia (SEEK, Jobstreet and Jobsdb), and its seekAi employer tools label and rank applicants as 'high-fit' using a model trained on millions of past hirer shortlisting decisions, target job ads at predicted high-fit candidates, and run AI voice or text pre-screens, recommended shortlists and reference checks through a feature called Assist.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
SEEK leads hackajob on 6 of the 7 criteria.
SEEK scores 54 and hackajob 45 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. SEEK leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so hackajob is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 SEEK leads is Data Governance Disclosure, hackajob 58 to SEEK 60. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (hackajob 20, SEEK 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 42% of the weighted advantage SEEK holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob0
- SEEK6
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 40
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, SEEK under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | hackajob | SEEK |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | AU |
| Founded | 2014 | 1997 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight42% of the movement so far
hackajob20SEEK403.6 weighted points to SEEK
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight66% of the movement so far
hackajob60SEEK702.0 weighted points to SEEK
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight83% of the movement so far
hackajob38SEEK501.4 weighted points to SEEK
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight93% of the movement so far
hackajob55SEEK620.8 weighted points to SEEK
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight96% of the movement so far
hackajob60SEEK640.3 weighted points to SEEK
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob58SEEK600.3 weighted points to SEEK
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -8.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.5 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 -8.5.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus SEEK, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | SEEK | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 70 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 40 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 54F | -9 | -8.5 |
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 | SEEK | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 7 | Audit reportSources 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; SEEK has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for SEEK sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 72 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 30 for SEEK, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SEEK 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.