§ The result
HackerRank leads Teamtailor by 8 points.
HackerRank scores 55 and Teamtailor 47 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. HackerRank leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Teamtailor leads 2, including FRIA Support, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HackerRank 68, Teamtailor 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 69% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 4 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
HackerRank is filed under Assessment AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated 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 | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2009 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HackerRank 68 · Teamtailor 30
6.8 weighted points to HackerRank
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HackerRank 60 · Teamtailor 50
2.0 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HackerRank 35 · Teamtailor 42
1.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HackerRank 60 · Teamtailor 54
0.7 weighted points to HackerRank
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HackerRank 55 · Teamtailor 58
0.4 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HackerRank 45 · Teamtailor 42
0.4 weighted points to HackerRank
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +8.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerRank minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | HackerRank | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 30 | +38 | +6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 47 (F) | +8 | +8.4 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 2 | 1 | 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 | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
HackerRank has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerRank last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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