Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Humanly
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
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
4 points separate HackerEarth and Humanly.
HackerEarth holds a 4-point edge over Humanly under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42, across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of HackerEarth: HackerEarth is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Humanly on Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (HackerEarth 52, Humanly 40) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (HackerEarth 55, Humanly 45), the second being 35% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth4
- Humanly3
- Widest raw gap
- Data Governance Disclosure52 vs 40
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Humanly under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Humanly |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2018 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight28% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55Humanly452.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight53% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52Humanly401.8 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight72% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Humanly301.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight85% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Humanly400.9 weighted points to Humanly
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Humanly350.4 weighted points to Humanly
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Humanly520.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Humanly580.2 weighted points to Humanly
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Humanly, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Humanly | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 42F | +4 | +4.0 |
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 | Humanly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 12 | 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; Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Humanly last reviewed
- June 7, 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.