§ The result
HackerRank leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 25 points between HackerRank (Assessment) and Moonhub (Sourcing): 55 for HackerRank, 30 for Moonhub. HackerRank leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Moonhub leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HackerRank 68, Moonhub 18, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 36% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 7 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
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
HackerRank is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only HackerRank is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HackerRank | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerRank 68 · Moonhub 18
9.0 weighted points to HackerRank
20% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerRank 60 · Moonhub 30
6.0 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerRank 45 · Moonhub 22
2.8 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerRank 55 · Moonhub 40
2.3 weighted points to HackerRank
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HackerRank 62 · Moonhub 38
1.9 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerRank 35 · Moonhub 25
1.5 weighted points to HackerRank
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerRank 60 · Moonhub 48
1.4 weighted points to HackerRank
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +24.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +25 beside that +24.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerRank minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | HackerRank | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 30 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 18 | +50 | +9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 22 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 38 | +24 | +1.9 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 30 (F) | +25 | +24.9 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 6 | 7 | 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; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 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 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerRank last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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