Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Hogan Assessments
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
Hogan Assessments
Hogan Assessments provides science-based personality assessments - chiefly the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) - used to predict workplace performance for employee selection and development.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
1 point separates Hogan Assessments and HackerEarth.
Hogan Assessments holds a 1-point edge over HackerEarth under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. HackerEarth and Hogan Assessments each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Hogan Assessments holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 35, Hogan Assessments 44) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 62% of the weighted advantage Hogan Assessments holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth3
- Hogan Assessments3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency35 vs 44
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth and Hogan Assessments are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Hogan Assessments |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 1987 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight37% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Hogan Assessments441.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight60% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55Hogan Assessments501.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight74% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Hogan Assessments360.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight85% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Hogan Assessments520.5 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight94% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Hogan Assessments620.4 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Hogan Assessments400.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.9.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Hogan Assessments, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Hogan Assessments | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 44 | -9 | -1.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 36 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 47F | -1 | -0.9 |
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 | Hogan Assessments | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 20 | 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; Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Hogan Assessments 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.