Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Manatal
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
Manatal
Cloud-based applicant tracking system and recruitment CRM for agencies and HR teams, featuring an AI engine that scores and ranks candidates against job requirements and an asynchronous AI video Interviewer.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
HackerEarth takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, HackerEarth, filed under Assessment, finishes on 46 and Manatal, filed under ATS-integrated, on 41, 5 points apart. Manatal leads more of the criteria, 4 against 2 for HackerEarth, yet HackerEarth takes Article 11 Technical Documentation, which carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HackerEarth 55, Manatal 33 — and at a 20% weight it carries 65% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth2
- Manatal4
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation55 vs 33
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Manatal under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | TH |
| Founded | 2012 | 2019 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight56% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55Manatal334.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight85% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Manatal222.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight92% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Manatal600.5 weighted points to Manatal
- 4
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Manatal620.4 weighted points to Manatal
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight98% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Manatal330.1 weighted points to Manatal
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Manatal430.1 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.6.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Manatal, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 33 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 43 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 41F | +5 | +5.6 |
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 | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | 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; Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Manatal 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.