HomeCompareHackerEarth vs Saville Assessment

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

HackerEarth vs Saville Assessment

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

2 points separate Saville Assessment and HackerEarth.

Within the Assessment cohort, Saville Assessment edges HackerEarth by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 48 to 46. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of Saville Assessment: Saville Assessment is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HackerEarth on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency, at 18%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Saville Assessment (HackerEarth 35, Saville Assessment 42), 40% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is FRIA Support, HackerEarth 32 to Saville Assessment 40.

§ The record

HackerEarth and Saville Assessment are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.

RecordHackerEarthSaville Assessment
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded20122004

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 27% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    HackerEarth 35 · Saville Assessment 42

    1.3 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  2. 15% weight · 52% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    HackerEarth 32 · Saville Assessment 40

    1.2 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  3. 20% weight · 73% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    HackerEarth 55 · Saville Assessment 50

    1.0 weighted points to HackerEarth

  4. 12% weight · 83% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    HackerEarth 42 · Saville Assessment 38

    0.5 weighted points to HackerEarth

  5. 15% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    HackerEarth 52 · Saville Assessment 55

    0.4 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    HackerEarth 57 · Saville Assessment 60

    0.2 weighted points to Saville Assessment

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    HackerEarth 56 · Saville Assessment 55

    0.1 weighted points to HackerEarth

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -1.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is HackerEarth minus Saville Assessment.

CategoryWeightHackerEarthSaville AssessmentΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5550+5+1.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%3542-7-1.3
FRIA Support15%3240-8-1.2
Data Governance Disclosure15%5255-3-0.4
Human Oversight Design12%5655+1+0.1
Post-Market Monitoring12%4238+4+0.5
Customer Documentation8%5760-3-0.2
Total100%46 (F)48 (F)-2-1.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHackerEarthSaville Assessment
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%51Sources on the vendor's own domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%41Sources on the vendor's own domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%60Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%80Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%51Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%345Sources on the vendor's own domain346Audit reportSources 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; Saville Assessment has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Saville Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 79 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 40 for Saville Assessment, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
HackerEarth last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Saville Assessment 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.