§ The result
3 points separate Lever and HackerEarth.
Lever holds a 3-point edge over HackerEarth under rubric v1.0, 49 to 46, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Lever leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while HackerEarth leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HackerEarth 35, Lever 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage Lever holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
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.
Vendor profile
Lever
Lever is an AI-powered applicant tracking system and recruiting CRM that centralizes sourcing, candidate relationship management, AI candidate matching (Talent Fit), and hiring analytics for high-growth employers.
§ The record
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Lever under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only HackerEarth is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HackerEarth | Lever |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerEarth 35 · Lever 42
1.3 weighted points to Lever
15% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerEarth 52 · Lever 58
0.9 weighted points to Lever
20% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerEarth 55 · Lever 52
0.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerEarth 56 · Lever 60
0.5 weighted points to Lever
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerEarth 42 · Lever 45
0.4 weighted points to Lever
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerEarth 57 · Lever 58
0.1 weighted points to Lever
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Lever.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Lever | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 49 (F) | -3 | -2.5 |
§ 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 | Lever | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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 | 2 | 0 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Lever has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Lever sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
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 Lever, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Lever 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.
§ Where next