§ The result
Pinpoint leads HackerEarth on all 7 criteria.
Pinpoint sits 11 points above HackerEarth under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 46 — with Pinpoint filed under ATS-integrated and HackerEarth under Assessment. Pinpoint is ahead of HackerEarth on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being FRIA Support at HackerEarth 32 to Pinpoint 38. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HackerEarth 55, Pinpoint 72, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 31% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint holds across the 7 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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Pinpoint under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only HackerEarth is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HackerEarth | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | JE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerEarth 55 · Pinpoint 72
3.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerEarth 52 · Pinpoint 68
2.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerEarth 35 · Pinpoint 42
1.3 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerEarth 42 · Pinpoint 52
1.2 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerEarth 56 · Pinpoint 64
1.0 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerEarth 32 · Pinpoint 38
0.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerEarth 57 · Pinpoint 66
0.7 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 72 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 68 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 64 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 66 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 57 (F) | -11 | -10.8 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 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 Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint 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