Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Keka
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
Keka
Keka is an HR and payroll suite whose Keka Hire ATS scores each applicant against recruiter-defined role requirements and runs an AI screening conversation that decides which candidates reach the shortlist.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
HackerEarth leads Keka on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, HackerEarth, filed under Assessment, finishes on 46 and Keka, filed under ATS-integrated, on 37, 9 points apart. HackerEarth leads every one of the 7 criteria, Keka none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, HackerEarth 32 to Keka 30. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HackerEarth 55, Keka 30 — and at a 20% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth7
- Keka0
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation55 vs 30
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Keka under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only HackerEarth is in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Keka |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2012 | 2014 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight53% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55Keka305.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight82% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Keka202.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight89% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Keka500.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight93% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Keka300.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight96% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52Keka500.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight98% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Keka400.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Keka550.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Keka, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Keka | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 30 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 37F | +9 | +9.4 |
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 | Keka | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | 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; Keka has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 74 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Keka, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Keka 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.