§ 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.
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
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.
§ The record
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Manatal under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| 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.
20% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerEarth 55 · Manatal 33
4.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerEarth 35 · Manatal 22
2.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerEarth 56 · Manatal 60
0.5 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerEarth 57 · Manatal 62
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerEarth 32 · Manatal 33
0.1 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerEarth 42 · Manatal 43
0.1 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.
| 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% | 46 (F) | 41 (F) | +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.
§ Where next