Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs HireQuotient
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
HireQuotient
EasySource by HireQuotient is an AI recruiting platform for North American frontline employers that sources and scores candidates from LinkedIn, the open web and partner databases, verifies licences, automates outreach including AI voice calls, and adds an ATS, interview scheduling, and skills, cognitive and AI-scored video assessments.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
HackerEarth leads HireQuotient by 12 points.
HackerEarth sits 12 points above HireQuotient under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 34 — with HackerEarth filed under Assessment and HireQuotient under Sourcing. HackerEarth leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while HireQuotient leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HackerEarth 55, HireQuotient 35, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 32% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth6
- HireQuotient1
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation55 vs 35
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, HireQuotient under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | HireQuotient |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2012 | 2021 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight32% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55HireQuotient354.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight57% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35HireQuotient183.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight71% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52HireQuotient401.8 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight83% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32HireQuotient221.5 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight95% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42HireQuotient301.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight99% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57HireQuotient500.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56HireQuotient570.1 weighted points to HireQuotient
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.5 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 +12.2.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus HireQuotient, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | HireQuotient | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 35 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 18 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 22 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 57 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 34F | +12 | +12.2 |
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 | HackerEarth | HireQuotient | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 5 | 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; HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 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 HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireQuotient 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.