Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Loxo
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
Loxo
Loxo is an AI-native talent-intelligence platform that combines candidate sourcing, a recruiting CRM, and an applicant tracking system, using proprietary ranking models and a self-built talent graph of 800M+ people to source, rank, and match candidates for recruiting and staffing firms.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
HackerEarth leads Loxo by 9 points.
Under rubric v1.0, HackerEarth, filed under Assessment, finishes on 46 and Loxo, filed under Sourcing, on 37, 9 points apart. Loxo takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Customer Documentation among them, against 6 for HackerEarth, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HackerEarth 55, Loxo 30 — and at a 20% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth6
- Loxo1
- 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, Loxo under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only HackerEarth is in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Loxo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2012 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight54% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55Loxo305.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight82% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Loxo202.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight90% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Loxo500.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight93% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Loxo300.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight97% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52Loxo500.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight99% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Loxo400.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Loxo580.1 weighted points to Loxo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 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 +9.2.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Loxo, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Loxo | 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 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 37F | +9 | +9.2 |
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 | Loxo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 7 | 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; Loxo has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 7 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 Loxo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Loxo 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.