Skip to content
Singulariki

Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers vs Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts

Side-by-side · O*NET · BLS · AI-exposure research · Anthropic Economic Index

A factual, source-backed comparison of Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers and Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts on the dimensions both occupations carry. Every figure is a position within an independent published dataset — not a verdict on which job is better, safer, or more “future-proof.”

Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts
Median pay · BLS OEWS
$115,230
$80,190
Employment · BLS OEWS
16,230
127,450
AI exposure (percentile) · task overlap, not automation
46th pct
79th pct

At a glance

Dimension Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts
Median pay $115,230 $80,190
Employment 16,230 127,450
Employment outlook (2024–34) · BLS projection Declining (-0.7%) About average (+3.1%)
Annual openings · BLS projection 500 10,300
Typical education · O*NET Most of these occupations require graduate school. For example, they may require a master's degree, and some require a Ph.D., M.D., or J.D. (law degree). Most of these occupations require a four-year bachelor's degree, but some do not.
AI exposure · published exposure studies Moderate · 46th pct High · 79th pct
Global GenAI gradient · ILO ISCO-08 · via crosswalk 59th pct · 31% of tasks 82nd pct · 45% of tasks
Observed AI use · Anthropic Economic Index Augmentation-leaning (55.5%) Augmentation-leaning (54.9%)
Mostly remote-capable · Dingel–Neiman Yes Yes

Pay and employment are BLS OEWS estimates; outlook and openings are BLS 2024–2034 projections; AI exposure and observed-use figures come from separate research and reflect exposure and usage, not predictions that either job will disappear. Compare like with like.

Skills

Shared: Law and Government, Reading Comprehension, Active Listening, Critical Thinking, Oral Comprehension, Written Comprehension, Inductive Reasoning, Writing, Judgment and Decision Making, English Language, Written Expression, Deductive Reasoning, Speaking, Oral Expression, Problem Sensitivity, Social Perceptiveness, Complex Problem Solving, Speech Clarity, Customer and Personal Service, Active Learning, Information Ordering, Near Vision, Speech Recognition, Monitoring, Administration and Management, Negotiation, Time Management, Selective Attention, Coordination, Persuasion, Service Orientation, Flexibility of Closure, Instructing.

Specific to Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers

  • Administrative
  • Medicine and Dentistry
  • Category Flexibility
  • Learning Strategies
  • Fluency of Ideas
  • Originality
  • Systems Analysis

Specific to Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts

  • Economics and Accounting
  • Computers and Electronics
  • Mathematics
  • Education and Training
  • Public Safety and Security
  • Mathematics
  • Management of Personnel Resources

Knowledge, skills & abilities O*NET rates as important for each occupation. “Shared” are common to both; the columns list what is distinctive to each (top by the order O*NET surfaces).

Tools & technology

Shared: Office suite software , Document management software , Data base user interface and query software , Spreadsheet software , Electronic mail software , Presentation software , Word processing software , Enterprise resource planning ERP software , Information retrieval or search software .

Specific to Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers

Specific to Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts

Full profiles

This page is a summary. See the complete source-backed profile for Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers or Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts — tasks, the full skill graph, tools, work context, preparation, wages by percentile, industries, AI exposure and the AI work map.

More comparisons

Related occupations you can place side by side on the same sourced scale.

Sources for this page

Every figure above traces to a named public dataset and the exact release below — not hand-written opinion. See the full methodology for what each measure does and does not mean.

Data compiled June 2, 2026. Figures are estimates, not advice.

Cite this page
Plain

Singulariki. "Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers vs Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts." Singulariki: a source-backed encyclopedia of work. Built from O*NET 30.3; BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) May 2024; BLS Employment Projections 2024–2034; Anthropic Economic Index v4 (2026-01-15) + v2 (2025-03-27); Microsoft “Working with AI” working-with-ai; “GPTs are GPTs” (Eloundou et al.) arXiv 2303.10130; AI Occupational Exposure (AIOE) Felten, Raj & Seamans; ILO / Gmyrek et al. GenAI exposure gradient 2025; IBS O*NET-SOC ↔ ISCO-08 occupation crosswalk 2022; Frey & Osborne (2013) frey-osborne-automation; Dingel & Neiman (2020) dingel-neiman-workathome. Accessed June 7, 2026. https://singulariki.com/compare/administrative-law-judges-adjudicators-and-hearing-officers-vs-fraud-examiners-investigators-and-analysts

APA

Singulariki. (2026). Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers vs Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts. Singulariki: a source-backed encyclopedia of work. Retrieved June 7, 2026, from https://singulariki.com/compare/administrative-law-judges-adjudicators-and-hearing-officers-vs-fraud-examiners-investigators-and-analysts

BibTeX 
@misc{singulariki-administrative-law-judges-adjudicators-and-hearing-officers-vs-fraud-examiners-investigators-and-analysts,
  title  = {Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers vs Fraud Examiners, Investigators and Analysts},
  author = {{Singulariki}},
  year   = {2026},
  note   = {O*NET 30.3; BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) May 2024; BLS Employment Projections 2024–2034; Anthropic Economic Index v4 (2026-01-15) + v2 (2025-03-27); Microsoft “Working with AI” working-with-ai; “GPTs are GPTs” (Eloundou et al.) arXiv 2303.10130; AI Occupational Exposure (AIOE) Felten, Raj & Seamans; ILO / Gmyrek et al. GenAI exposure gradient 2025; IBS O*NET-SOC ↔ ISCO-08 occupation crosswalk 2022; Frey & Osborne (2013) frey-osborne-automation; Dingel & Neiman (2020) dingel-neiman-workathome. Accessed June 7, 2026},
  url    = {https://singulariki.com/compare/administrative-law-judges-adjudicators-and-hearing-officers-vs-fraud-examiners-investigators-and-analysts}
}

Citations name the underlying public dataset releases — they reflect what this page is built from, not just the URL.