Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Wonderlic
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
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
2 points separate hackajob and Wonderlic.
hackajob holds a 2-point edge over Wonderlic under rubric v1.0, 45 to 43, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Wonderlic takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for hackajob, whose share includes Data Governance Disclosure. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Wonderlic — hackajob 20, Wonderlic 48, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob6
- Wonderlic1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 48
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Wonderlic is in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 1937 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight42% of the movement so far
hackajob20Wonderlic485.0 weighted points to Wonderlic
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight67% of the movement so far
hackajob58Wonderlic383.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight80% of the movement so far
hackajob60Wonderlic521.6 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight89% of the movement so far
hackajob32Wonderlic251.1 weighted points to hackajob
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight94% of the movement so far
hackajob38Wonderlic330.6 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob60Wonderlic550.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob55Wonderlic520.4 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +2.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Wonderlic, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 48 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 38 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 43F | +2 | +2.0 |
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 | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 6 | 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; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic 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.