§ The result
HackerEarth leads Willo by 5 points.
HackerEarth scores 46 and Willo 41 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Assessment and Video interview cohorts. HackerEarth leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Willo leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 55, Willo 38) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 54% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 5 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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
§ The record
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Willo under Video interview 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.
| Record | HackerEarth | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2012 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerEarth 55 · Willo 38
3.4 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerEarth 32 · Willo 25
1.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerEarth 35 · Willo 30
0.9 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerEarth 56 · Willo 62
0.7 weighted points to Willo
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerEarth 42 · Willo 36
0.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerEarth 57 · Willo 54
0.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerEarth 52 · Willo 53
0.1 weighted points to Willo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Willo.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 38 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 53 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 62 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 36 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 54 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 41 (F) | +5 | +5.4 |
§ 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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 5 | 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; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo last reviewed
- June 7, 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