HomeCompareBullhorn vs Maki People

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Bullhorn vs Maki People

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Maki People leads Bullhorn by 8 points.

Maki People scores 62 (D) and Bullhorn 54 (F) under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Maki People leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Bullhorn leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Bullhorn 58, Maki People 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Bullhorn is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Maki People under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Maki People is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordBullhornMaki People
Price tierHighEnterprise
HeadquartersUSFR
Founded19992021

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 36% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Bullhorn 58 · Maki People 80

    4.0 weighted points to Maki People

  2. 15% weight · 61% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Bullhorn 38 · Maki People 57

    2.9 weighted points to Maki People

  3. 12% weight · 79% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Bullhorn 35 · Maki People 52

    2.0 weighted points to Maki People

  4. 12% weight · 90% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Bullhorn 60 · Maki People 50

    1.2 weighted points to Bullhorn

  5. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Bullhorn 60 · Maki People 70

    0.8 weighted points to Maki People

  6. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Bullhorn 60 · Maki People 62

    0.3 weighted points to Maki People

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -8.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.2 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 -8.8.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Bullhorn minus Maki People.

CategoryWeightBullhornMaki PeopleΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%6262--
Bias Audit Transparency18%5880-22-4.0
FRIA Support15%3857-19-2.9
Data Governance Disclosure15%6062-2-0.3
Human Oversight Design12%6050+10+1.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%3552-17-2.0
Customer Documentation8%6070-10-0.8
Total100%54 (F)62 (D)-8-8.8

§ 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.

CriterionWeightBullhornMaki People
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%1121Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%30Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%156Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain175Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Bullhorn has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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 Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Bullhorn, across 2 distinct source domains, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Bullhorn 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.