§ The result
HiPeople leads Darwinbox on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, HiPeople (Assessment) opens a 15-point lead on Darwinbox (ATS-integrated), 61 (D) to 46 (F). Darwinbox is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: HiPeople takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Article 11 Technical Documentation, Darwinbox 60 to HiPeople 62. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Darwinbox 28, HiPeople 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 64% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
Vendor profile
HiPeople
HiPeople is a Berlin-based hiring platform combining a 400+ test skills and personality assessment library, automated AI reference checks, AI resume/application screening that scores candidates against job criteria, and AI screening calls.
§ The record
Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HiPeople 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 HiPeople is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Darwinbox | HiPeople |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | DE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · HiPeople 84
10.1 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · HiPeople 60
3.0 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · HiPeople 62
0.8 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · HiPeople 35
0.8 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · HiPeople 66
0.7 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · HiPeople 62
0.4 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -15.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.8 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 -15.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus HiPeople.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | HiPeople | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 84 | -56 | -10.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 66 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 61 (D) | -15 | -15.8 |
§ 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 | Darwinbox | HiPeople | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiPeople sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 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