§ The result
1 point separates Metaview and Criteria.
Metaview (Screening) edges Criteria (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 54 to 53. Metaview leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Criteria leads 2, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Criteria takes Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20%, Criteria 68 to Metaview 38, 95% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Bias Audit Transparency, Criteria 48 to Metaview 80.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
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
Criteria 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 | Criteria | Metaview |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2006 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Metaview 38
6.0 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Metaview 80
5.8 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · Metaview 48
0.7 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Metaview 60
0.5 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Metaview 60
0.3 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · Metaview 62
0.2 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Metaview 33
0.1 weighted points to Metaview
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.6 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 -1.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Metaview.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Metaview | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 38 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 80 | -32 | -5.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 48 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 54 (F) | -1 | -1.0 |
§ 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 | Criteria | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 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 Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 16 for Metaview, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 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