§ The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads hackajob by 11 points.
Workday Recruiting AI, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 11 points above hackajob, filed under Sourcing: 56 against 45 under rubric v1.0. Workday Recruiting AI leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while hackajob leads 2, including Data Governance Disclosure. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — hackajob 20, Workday Recruiting AI 60 — and at an 18% weight it carries 64% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI 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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
§ The record
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Workday Recruiting AI under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only hackajob is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | hackajob | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
hackajob 20 · Workday Recruiting AI 60
7.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
hackajob 60 · Workday Recruiting AI 70
2.0 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
hackajob 55 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
1.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
hackajob 32 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
0.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
hackajob 58 · Workday Recruiting AI 55
0.4 weighted points to hackajob
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
hackajob 60 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
hackajob 38 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
0.4 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.4 — 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 -11 beside that -10.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Workday Recruiting AI.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 70 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 60 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 65 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 65 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 56 (F) | -11 | -10.4 |
§ 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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI last reviewed
- May 21, 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