§ The result
HackerRank leads micro1 on all 7 criteria.
HackerRank finishes 19 points clear of micro1 under rubric v1.0 — 55 against 36 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Of the 7 criteria micro1 wins none, and the narrowest lead HackerRank holds is on Article 11 Technical Documentation, HackerRank 60 to micro1 50. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HackerRank 68, micro1 20) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 45% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
HackerRank is filed under Assessment AI, micro1 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 | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerRank 68 · micro1 20
8.6 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerRank 45 · micro1 25
2.4 weighted points to HackerRank
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerRank 60 · micro1 50
2.0 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerRank 35 · micro1 22
1.9 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerRank 55 · micro1 45
1.5 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerRank 60 · micro1 48
1.4 weighted points to HackerRank
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerRank 62 · micro1 45
1.4 weighted points to HackerRank
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +19.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +19 beside that +19.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerRank minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | HackerRank | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 20 | +48 | +8.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 25 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 36 (F) | +19 | +19.3 |
§ 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 | HackerRank | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 25 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HackerRank has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HackerRank and micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerRank last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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.
§ Where next