Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Xobin
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
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
Xobin leads hackajob by 5 points.
Xobin scores 50 and hackajob 45 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Xobin leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while hackajob leads 1, including Data Governance Disclosure, and 2 are level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (hackajob 20, Xobin 43) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 77% of the weighted advantage Xobin holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob1
- Xobin4
- Level2
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency20 vs 43
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Xobin under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Xobin is in scope of
| Record | hackajob | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | IN |
| Founded | 2014 | 2016 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight75% of the movement so far
hackajob20Xobin434.1 weighted points to Xobin
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight83% of the movement so far
hackajob32Xobin350.4 weighted points to Xobin
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight91% of the movement so far
hackajob60Xobin620.4 weighted points to Xobin
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob55Xobin580.4 weighted points to Xobin
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob58Xobin570.1 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -5.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.2.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Xobin, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 43 | -23 | -4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 38 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 50F | -5 | -5.2 |
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 | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | 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; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 74 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin last reviewed
- September 25, 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.