Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Phenom
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
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
Phenom leads HackerEarth by 6 points.
Phenom scores 52 and HackerEarth 46 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. HackerEarth and Phenom each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Phenom holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 35, Phenom 75) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 81% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth3
- Phenom3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency35 vs 75
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Phenom under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only HackerEarth is in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2010 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight62% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Phenom757.2 weighted points to Phenom
- 2
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight75% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Phenom301.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight85% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52Phenom601.2 weighted points to Phenom
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight94% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Phenom251.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight99% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Phenom600.5 weighted points to Phenom
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Phenom550.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.2.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Phenom, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 75 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 52F | -6 | -6.2 |
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 | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | 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; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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.