Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs HiringBranch
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
HiringBranch
HiringBranch is an AI skills-assessment platform that measures 50+ communication and soft skills from candidates' open-ended, conversational job-simulation responses (text and voice) to screen and rank applicants for customer-facing roles.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
HiringBranch leads HackerEarth by 6 points.
HiringBranch finishes 6 points ahead of HackerEarth under rubric v1.0, 52 to 46, both scored as Assessment entries. HiringBranch leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while HackerEarth leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 35, HiringBranch 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 65% of the weighted advantage HiringBranch holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth2
- HiringBranch5
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency35 vs 60
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth and HiringBranch are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | HiringBranch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | CA |
| Founded | 2012 | 2014 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight59% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35HiringBranch604.5 weighted points to HiringBranch
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight72% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55HiringBranch601.0 weighted points to HiringBranch
- 3
Customer Documentation
8% weight79% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57HiringBranch640.6 weighted points to HiringBranch
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight85% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56HiringBranch520.5 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32HiringBranch350.4 weighted points to HiringBranch
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight97% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52HiringBranch550.4 weighted points to HiringBranch
- 7
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42HiringBranch400.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.2.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus HiringBranch, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | HiringBranch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 64 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 52F | -6 | -6.2 |
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 | HiringBranch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 6 | 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; HiringBranch has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for HiringBranch, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiringBranch last reviewed
- July 17, 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.