Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs micro1
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
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
HackerEarth leads micro1 on all 7 criteria.
HackerEarth sits 10 points above micro1 under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 36 — with HackerEarth filed under Assessment and micro1 under Screening. HackerEarth is ahead of micro1 on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Article 11 Technical Documentation at HackerEarth 55 to micro1 50. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 42, micro1 25) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (HackerEarth 35, micro1 20), 26% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth7
- micro10
- Widest raw gap
- Post-Market Monitoring42 vs 25
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, micro1 under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2022 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight26% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35micro1202.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight46% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42micro1252.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight61% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32micro1221.5 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight71% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52micro1451.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight81% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55micro1501.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight91% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56micro1481.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57micro1451.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +10.2.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus micro1, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 22 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 48 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 45 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 36F | +10 | +10.2 |
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 | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 8 | 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; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 72 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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.