Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs X0PA 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
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
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.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob2
- X0PA AI4
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 44
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, X0PA AI under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only X0PA AI is in scope of
| 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.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight54% of the movement so far
hackajob20X0PA AI444.3 weighted points to X0PA AI
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight79% of the movement so far
hackajob60X0PA AI502.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight90% of the movement so far
hackajob32X0PA AI380.9 weighted points to X0PA AI
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight94% of the movement so far
hackajob58X0PA AI560.3 weighted points to hackajob
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob55X0PA AI570.2 weighted points to X0PA AI
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob38X0PA AI400.2 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, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| 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% | 45F | 48F | -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.