Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Workday Recruiting AI
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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
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.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob2
- Workday Recruiting AI5
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 60
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
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
Only hackajob is in scope of
| 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.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight60% of the movement so far
hackajob20Workday Recruiting AI607.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight76% of the movement so far
hackajob60Workday Recruiting AI702.0 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight86% of the movement so far
hackajob55Workday Recruiting AI651.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight90% of the movement so far
hackajob32Workday Recruiting AI350.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight94% of the movement so far
hackajob58Workday Recruiting AI550.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob60Workday Recruiting AI650.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 7
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob38Workday Recruiting AI350.4 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, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| 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% | 45F | 56F | -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.