§ The result
HackerRank leads Humanly on 6 of the 7 criteria.
HackerRank, filed under Assessment, comes out 13 points above Humanly, filed under Screening: 55 against 42 under rubric v1.0. Humanly is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: HackerRank takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, HackerRank 60 to Humanly 58. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HackerRank 68, Humanly 40, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HackerRank
HackerRank is a technical skills assessment platform for developer hiring that uses coding tests, interviews, and AI-based features (question generation, ML plagiarism/AI-code detection, and image-analysis proctoring) to evaluate candidates.
Vendor profile
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
§ The record
HackerRank is filed under Assessment AI, Humanly under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HackerRank | Humanly |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerRank 68 · Humanly 40
5.0 weighted points to HackerRank
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerRank 60 · Humanly 45
3.0 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerRank 55 · Humanly 40
2.3 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerRank 45 · Humanly 30
1.8 weighted points to HackerRank
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerRank 62 · Humanly 52
0.8 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerRank 60 · Humanly 58
0.2 weighted points to HackerRank
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +13.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +13.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerRank minus Humanly.
| Category | Weight | HackerRank | Humanly | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 40 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 42 (F) | +13 | +13.1 |
§ 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 | HackerRank | Humanly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HackerRank has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HackerRank sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerRank last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Humanly 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