Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Willo
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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
Substantial gaps
Video interview
The result
4 points separate hackajob and Willo.
hackajob holds a 4-point edge over Willo under rubric v1.0, 45 to 41, across the Sourcing and Video interview cohorts. Willo takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for hackajob, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — hackajob 60, Willo 38 — and at a 20% weight it carries 64% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob5
- Willo2
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation60 vs 38
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% 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, Willo under Video interview AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Willo is in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 2018 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight46% of the movement so far
hackajob60Willo384.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight65% of the movement so far
hackajob20Willo301.8 weighted points to Willo
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight76% of the movement so far
hackajob32Willo251.1 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight85% of the movement so far
hackajob55Willo620.8 weighted points to Willo
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight92% of the movement so far
hackajob58Willo530.8 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob60Willo540.5 weighted points to hackajob
- 7
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob38Willo360.2 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.6 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 +4.3.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Willo, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 38 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 53 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 36 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 41F | +4 | +4.3 |
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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 0 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 5 | 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; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo 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.