§ The result
Maki People leads Canditech by 23 points.
Maki People finishes 23 points clear of Canditech inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 62 (D) against 39 (F). Maki People leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Canditech leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Canditech 25, Maki People 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Canditech
Canditech is a skills-assessment and job-simulation platform that screens candidates with work-sample tests, technical and soft-skill assessments, and one-way video interviews, using AI agents to auto-score open-text and video responses.
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
Canditech 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 | Canditech | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IL | FR |
| Founded | 2019 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Canditech 25 · Maki People 80
9.9 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Canditech 37 · Maki People 62
5.0 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Canditech 30 · Maki People 57
4.0 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Canditech 32 · Maki People 52
2.4 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Canditech 52 · Maki People 62
1.5 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Canditech 58 · Maki People 70
1.0 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Canditech 53 · Maki People 50
0.4 weighted points to Canditech
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -23.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -23.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Canditech minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | Canditech | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 37 | 62 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 80 | -55 | -9.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 57 | -27 | -4.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 52 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 70 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 62 (D) | -23 | -23.4 |
§ 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 | Canditech | 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 | — | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Canditech has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 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 Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Canditech last reviewed
- July 17, 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