§ The result
Harver leads HackerEarth by 10 points.
Harver sits 10 points above HackerEarth under rubric v1.0, 56 against 46, with both filed under Assessment. Harver leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while HackerEarth leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HackerEarth 35, Harver 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 72% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HackerEarth
HackerEarth is a technical-hiring platform that auto-scores coding assessments under AI proctoring, runs FaceCode live coding interviews with AI-generated summaries, and offers OnScreen, an AI video-avatar interviewer that scores candidates against a fixed rubric.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
§ The record
HackerEarth and Harver are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| Record | HackerEarth | Harver |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2012 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerEarth 35 · Harver 80
8.1 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerEarth 55 · Harver 65
2.0 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerEarth 56 · Harver 50
0.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerEarth 32 · Harver 35
0.4 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerEarth 52 · Harver 55
0.4 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerEarth 42 · Harver 40
0.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerEarth 57 · Harver 60
0.2 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Harver.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Harver | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 65 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 80 | -45 | -8.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 56 (F) | -10 | -10.3 |
§ 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 | HackerEarth | Harver | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 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 | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Harver 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.
§ Where next