Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs Workday Recruiting AI
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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads HackerEarth by 10 points.
Workday Recruiting AI sits 10 points above HackerEarth under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 46 — with Workday Recruiting AI filed under ATS-integrated and HackerEarth under Assessment. Workday Recruiting AI leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while HackerEarth leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 35, Workday Recruiting AI 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 44% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth1
- Workday Recruiting AI6
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency35 vs 60
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, Workday Recruiting AI under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only HackerEarth is in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2005 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight41% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35Workday Recruiting AI604.5 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight68% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55Workday Recruiting AI703.0 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight78% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56Workday Recruiting AI651.1 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight86% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42Workday Recruiting AI350.8 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight92% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57Workday Recruiting AI650.6 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 6
FRIA Support
15% weight96% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32Workday Recruiting AI350.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
- 7
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52Workday Recruiting AI550.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.0 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 -9.3.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus Workday Recruiting AI, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 70 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 65 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 65 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 56F | -10 | -9.3 |
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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 1 | 0 | Sources 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 | 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 | 9 | 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; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI 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.