Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerRank vs Saville Assessment
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
Saville Assessment
Saville Assessment publishes the Wave personality questionnaires, Swift aptitude tests and situational judgment tests. They are scored automatically against norm groups and delivered through the Oasys platform, the Wave Connect hiring platform (which uses AI to build role profiles from job descriptions) and a two-minute Screener that returns a fit band into the employer's ATS.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
HackerRank leads Saville Assessment by 7 points.
HackerRank scores 55 and Saville Assessment 48 under rubric v1.0 — a 7-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of HackerRank, with 1 level: HackerRank is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Saville Assessment on FRIA Support. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HackerRank 68, Saville Assessment 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 57% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerRank5
- Saville Assessment1
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency68 vs 42
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerRank and Saville Assessment are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | HackerRank | Saville Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2009 | 2004 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight52% of the movement so far
HackerRank68Saville Assessment424.7 weighted points to HackerRank
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight74% of the movement so far
HackerRank60Saville Assessment502.0 weighted points to HackerRank
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight83% of the movement so far
HackerRank45Saville Assessment380.8 weighted points to HackerRank
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight92% of the movement so far
HackerRank35Saville Assessment400.8 weighted points to Saville Assessment
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight98% of the movement so far
HackerRank60Saville Assessment550.6 weighted points to HackerRank
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerRank62Saville Assessment600.2 weighted points to HackerRank
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +7.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +7.5.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerRank minus Saville Assessment, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerRank | Saville Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 42 | +26 | +4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 55F | 48F | +7 | +7.5 |
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 | Saville Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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 | 34 | 6 | Audit reportSources 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; Saville Assessment has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HackerRank and Saville Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains, and 40 for Saville Assessment, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerRank last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Saville Assessment 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.