§ The result
3 points separate X0PA AI and hackajob.
X0PA AI holds a 3-point edge over hackajob under rubric v1.0, 48 to 45, across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of X0PA AI, with 1 level: X0PA AI is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and hackajob on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — hackajob 20, X0PA AI 44 — and at an 18% weight it carries 76% of the weighted advantage X0PA AI holds across the 4 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
X0PA AI
X0PA AI is a Singapore-based B2B AI recruitment platform (applicant tracking system) that sources, screens, scores, and ranks candidates using proprietary predictive-scoring models (BRIQ Score and Suitability Score) plus the X0PA ROOM video-interview/assessment product, marketed around bias-reduced, "responsible and explainable" AI hiring.
§ The record
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, X0PA AI under Assessment 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 X0PA AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | hackajob | X0PA AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | GB | SG |
| Founded | 2014 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
hackajob 20 · X0PA AI 44
4.3 weighted points to X0PA AI
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
hackajob 60 · X0PA AI 50
2.0 weighted points to hackajob
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
hackajob 32 · X0PA AI 38
0.9 weighted points to X0PA AI
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
hackajob 58 · X0PA AI 56
0.3 weighted points to hackajob
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
hackajob 55 · X0PA AI 57
0.2 weighted points to X0PA AI
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
hackajob 38 · X0PA AI 40
0.2 weighted points to X0PA AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -3.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus X0PA AI.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | X0PA AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 44 | -24 | -4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 48 (F) | -3 | -3.4 |
§ 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 | X0PA AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; X0PA AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for X0PA AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 18 for X0PA AI, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- X0PA AI last reviewed
- July 17, 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