SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to HackerRank

Other Recruiting assessment vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at HackerRank. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 42 that differ from HackerRank on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

HackerRank has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at HackerRank” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at HackerRankFound at HackerRank, not found there
Bryqbryq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Bryq 70/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +1 1 Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
TestGorillatestgorilla.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TestGorilla 57/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Toggl Hiretoggl.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Toggl Hire 52/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
CodeSignalcodesignal.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CodeSignal 48/100 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Predictive Indexpredictiveindex.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Predictive Index 48/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 2 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Qualifiedqualified.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Qualified 48/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +1 4 Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 Compare
Criteriacriteriacorp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Criteria 43/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
HireVuehirevue.comSee also Transparency alternatives to HireVue 43/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Adafaceadaface.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Adaface 48/100 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
CoderPadcoderpad.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to CoderPad 48/100 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Traitifytraitify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Traitify 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare
Vervoevervoe.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Vervoe 35/100 3 Data location stated, No third-party tracking before consent, Named privacy contact 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure Compare

Only criteria we could measure for both are counted. Where we could measure one and not the other, the row is silent: that would be a statement about our measurement, not about either vendor. Every single result with its source is on the two profiles.