§ The result
Maki People leads Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 separates Maki People and Aon Assessment, both Assessment entries, by 27 points: 62 (D) for Maki People, 35 (F) for Aon Assessment. Maki People leads every one of the 7 criteria and 6 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Aon Assessment leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Aon Assessment 30, Maki People 80, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Aon Assessment
Aon Assessment Solutions (formerly cut-e) provides enterprise pre-hire psychometric assessments - ability, personality (ADEPT-15), situational-judgement, gamified cognitive (smartPredict/gridChallenge) tests and an AI-scored video interview tool (vidAssess-AI) - used to screen and rank job applicants at scale.
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
Aon Assessment and Maki People are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Aon Assessment | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | FR |
| Founded | 2002 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Maki People 80
9.0 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 50% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Maki People 57
4.8 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Maki People 62
4.4 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Maki People 62
3.6 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Maki People 52
3.2 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Maki People 70
1.8 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Maki People 50
0.6 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -27.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 27.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -27 beside that -27.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 62 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 80 | -50 | -9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 57 | -32 | -4.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 62 | -24 | -3.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 52 | -27 | -3.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 70 | -22 | -1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 62 (D) | -27 | -27.4 |
§ 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 | Aon Assessment | Maki People | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources 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% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 6 | 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 |
Aon Assessment has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 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 Aon Assessment and Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 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