§ The result
Rippling leads HackerEarth on all 7 criteria.
Rippling sits 10 points above HackerEarth under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 46 — with Rippling filed under ATS-integrated and HackerEarth under Assessment. Rippling is ahead of HackerEarth on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at HackerEarth 56 to Rippling 60. The advantage Rippling holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (HackerEarth 55, Rippling 73, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 35% of the weighted points Rippling gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only HackerEarth is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HackerEarth | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerEarth 55 · Rippling 73
3.6 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerEarth 32 · Rippling 45
1.9 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerEarth 52 · Rippling 64
1.8 weighted points to Rippling
18% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerEarth 35 · Rippling 42
1.3 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerEarth 42 · Rippling 47
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerEarth 57 · Rippling 64
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerEarth 56 · Rippling 60
0.5 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.3 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 -10.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 73 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 45 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 64 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 47 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 64 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 56 (F) | -10 | -10.3 |
§ 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 | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 12 | 1 | 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; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling 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