§ The result
1 point separates Maki People and Alva Labs.
Within the Assessment cohort, Maki People edges Alva Labs by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 62 to 61. Alva Labs and Maki People each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Maki People holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Alva Labs 58, Maki People 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Alva Labs
Alva Labs sells a science-backed hiring platform whose core is a suite of proprietary psychometric assessments - an adaptive logic (general mental ability) test, a Five-Factor Model personality test, and coding tests - wrapped in candidate management, CV screening, and structured-interview tooling.
Vendor profile
Maki People
Maki People is a Paris-based AI hiring platform whose core product is pre-hire assessment and screening of candidate skills, behaviors, and situational judgement at high volume, extended with conversational AI agents for screening, interview support, and scheduling.
§ The record
Alva Labs and Maki People are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alva Labs | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SE | FR |
| Founded | 2017 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alva Labs 58 · Maki People 80
4.0 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alva Labs 78 · Maki People 62
3.2 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alva Labs 38 · Maki People 57
2.9 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alva Labs 63 · Maki People 50
1.6 weighted points to Alva Labs
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alva Labs 68 · Maki People 62
0.9 weighted points to Alva Labs
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alva Labs 68 · Maki People 70
0.2 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alva Labs minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | Alva Labs | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 62 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 80 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 57 | -19 | -2.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 62 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 50 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 70 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 62 (D) | -1 | -1.3 |
§ 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 | Alva Labs | Maki People | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Alva Labs has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Maki People has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alva Labs and Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Alva Labs, across 2 distinct source domains, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alva Labs last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Maki People 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