Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs ZipRecruiter
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
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
hackajob leads ZipRecruiter by 5 points.
hackajob scores 45 and ZipRecruiter 40 under rubric v1.0 — a 5-point gap inside the Sourcing cohort. hackajob leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while ZipRecruiter leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (hackajob 60, ZipRecruiter 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 65% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob4
- ZipRecruiter2
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation60 vs 40
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob and ZipRecruiter are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | hackajob | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2010 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight56% of the movement so far
hackajob60ZipRecruiter404.0 weighted points to hackajob
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight69% of the movement so far
hackajob58ZipRecruiter520.9 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight80% of the movement so far
hackajob32ZipRecruiter270.8 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight90% of the movement so far
hackajob20ZipRecruiter240.7 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
hackajob60ZipRecruiter540.5 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob38ZipRecruiter400.2 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 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 ZipRecruiter, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 40 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 24 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 27 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 40F | +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 | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 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; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 75 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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.