§ 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.
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
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.
§ The record
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Willo under Video interview AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Willo is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| 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.
20% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
hackajob 60 · Willo 38
4.4 weighted points to hackajob
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
hackajob 20 · Willo 30
1.8 weighted points to Willo
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
hackajob 32 · Willo 25
1.1 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
hackajob 55 · Willo 62
0.8 weighted points to Willo
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
hackajob 58 · Willo 53
0.8 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
hackajob 60 · Willo 54
0.5 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
hackajob 38 · Willo 36
0.2 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.
| 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% | 45 (F) | 41 (F) | +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.
§ Where next