Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs HireLogic
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
Substantial gaps
Video interview
The result
HackerEarth leads HireLogic on all 7 criteria.
HackerEarth, filed under Assessment, comes out 12 points above HireLogic, filed under Video interview: 46 against 34 under rubric v1.0. HackerEarth leads every one of the 7 criteria, HireLogic none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, HackerEarth 32 to HireLogic 25. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HackerEarth 35, HireLogic 15, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 30% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth7
- HireLogic0
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency35 vs 15
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, HireLogic under Video interview AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | HireLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | Not recorded |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight30% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35HireLogic153.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight52% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55HireLogic422.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight66% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42HireLogic281.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight75% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32HireLogic251.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight84% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52HireLogic451.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight92% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56HireLogic481.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57HireLogic451.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.9.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus HireLogic, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | HireLogic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 15 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 48 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 28 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 45 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 34F | +12 | +11.9 |
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 | HireLogic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireLogic 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.