Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Criteria vs Metaview
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
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.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
1 point separates Metaview and Criteria.
Metaview (Screening) edges Criteria (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 54 to 53. Criteria takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 5 for Metaview, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Criteria takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Criteria 68, Metaview 38), 95% of the weighted advantage it builds, while the widest raw gap is on Bias Audit Transparency, Criteria 48 to Metaview 80.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Criteria2
- Metaview5
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency48 vs 80
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Metaview under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| 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.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight44% of the movement so far
Criteria68Metaview386.0 weighted points to Criteria
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight87% of the movement so far
Criteria48Metaview805.8 weighted points to Metaview
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight92% of the movement so far
Criteria42Metaview480.7 weighted points to Metaview
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight96% of the movement so far
Criteria56Metaview600.5 weighted points to Metaview
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight98% of the movement so far
Criteria62Metaview600.3 weighted points to Criteria
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight99% of the movement so far
Criteria60Metaview620.2 weighted points to Metaview
- 7
FRIA Support
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Criteria32Metaview330.1 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, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| 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% | 53F | 54F | -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.