Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs Maki People
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
Concerning
ATS-integrated
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.
Concerning
Assessment
The result
Greenhouse and Maki People tie at 67.
Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Maki People (Assessment) tie at 67 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Greenhouse leads 3 of the 7 criteria and Maki People 2, with 2 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, FRIA Support, is both the widest raw gap (Greenhouse 42, Maki People 62) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 15% weight it makes up 79% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 2 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse3
- Maki People2
- Level2
- Widest raw gap
- FRIA Support42 vs 62
- Heaviest weighted swing
- FRIA Support15% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Maki People under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Maki People is in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | FR |
| Founded | 2012 | 2021 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
FRIA Support
15% weight37% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42Maki People623.0 weighted points to Maki People
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight72% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78Maki People642.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight86% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86Maki People801.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
Customer Documentation
8% weight96% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Maki People740.8 weighted points to Maki People
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58Maki People550.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Maki People, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 64 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 80 | +6 | +1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 62 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 64 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 66 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 74 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 67D | - | +0.4 |
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 | Greenhouse | Maki People | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 25 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Maki People has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for Maki People, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Maki People last reviewed
- September 8, 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.