§ The result
Metaview leads Canditech on all 7 criteria.
Metaview finishes 15 points clear of Canditech under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 39 — across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Metaview leads every one of the 7 criteria, Canditech none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Article 11 Technical Documentation, Canditech 37 to Metaview 38. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Canditech 25, Metaview 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 67% of the weighted advantage Metaview holds across the 7 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
Metaview
Metaview is an AI recruiting platform whose agents transcribe and summarize interviews into structured notes and scorecards, and whose Application Review feature screens and ranks inbound applicants against an auto-generated Ideal Candidate Profile with fit ratings.
§ The record
Canditech is filed under Assessment AI, Metaview under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Canditech | Metaview |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IL | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Canditech 25 · Metaview 80
9.9 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Canditech 32 · Metaview 48
1.9 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Canditech 52 · Metaview 60
1.2 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Canditech 53 · Metaview 60
0.8 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Canditech 30 · Metaview 33
0.4 weighted points to Metaview
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Canditech 58 · Metaview 62
0.3 weighted points to Metaview
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Canditech 37 · Metaview 38
0.2 weighted points to Metaview
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -14.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Canditech minus Metaview.
| Category | Weight | Canditech | Metaview | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 37 | 38 | -1 | -0.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 80 | -55 | -9.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 60 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 48 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 54 (F) | -15 | -14.8 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Canditech | Metaview | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 13 | 3 | 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; Metaview has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Metaview sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain, and 16 for Metaview, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Canditech last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Metaview last reviewed
- June 7, 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