§ The result
Maki People leads DevSkiller by 23 points.
Maki People finishes 23 points clear of DevSkiller 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 DevSkiller leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — DevSkiller 22, Maki People 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
DevSkiller
DevSkiller (now branded SkillPanel) provides technical skills assessment and coding tests that automatically score developer candidates on real-world work-sample tasks using hidden verification unit tests and static code analysis.
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
DevSkiller 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 | DevSkiller | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | PL | FR |
| Founded | 2014 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · Maki People 80
10.4 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · Maki People 62
5.4 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
DevSkiller 25 · Maki People 57
4.8 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · Maki People 62
1.5 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · Maki People 52
1.4 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
DevSkiller 58 · Maki People 70
1.0 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
DevSkiller 55 · Maki People 50
0.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -23.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.1 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 -23.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 62 | -27 | -5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 80 | -58 | -10.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 57 | -32 | -4.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 70 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 62 (D) | -23 | -23.9 |
§ 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 | DevSkiller | Maki People | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 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 DevSkiller and Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller 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