Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Handshake vs HiPeople
Handshake
Handshake is an early-career recruiting network whose employer tools use AI to rank applicants against employer-set criteria, find and message matching students and graduates, and target job promotions.
Substantial gaps
Screening
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.
Concerning
Assessment
The result
HiPeople leads Handshake on all 7 criteria.
HiPeople sits 11 points above Handshake under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 50 (F) — with HiPeople filed under Assessment and Handshake under Screening. Of the 7 criteria Handshake wins none, and the narrowest lead HiPeople holds is on Data Governance Disclosure, Handshake 57 to HiPeople 58. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Handshake 52, HiPeople 84) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Handshake0
- HiPeople7
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency52 vs 84
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Handshake is filed under Screening AI, HiPeople under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only HiPeople is in scope of
| Record | Handshake | HiPeople |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2014 | 2019 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight49% of the movement so far
Handshake52HiPeople845.8 weighted points to HiPeople
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight72% of the movement so far
Handshake48HiPeople622.8 weighted points to HiPeople
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight84% of the movement so far
Handshake48HiPeople601.4 weighted points to HiPeople
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
Handshake30HiPeople350.8 weighted points to HiPeople
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
Handshake58HiPeople620.5 weighted points to HiPeople
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight99% of the movement so far
Handshake60HiPeople660.5 weighted points to HiPeople
- 7
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Handshake57HiPeople580.1 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.9.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Handshake minus HiPeople, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Handshake | HiPeople | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 84 | -32 | -5.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 66 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 50F | 61D | -11 | -11.9 |
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 | Handshake | HiPeople | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 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% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Handshake has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 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 Handshake and HiPeople sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Handshake, across 2 distinct source domains, and 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Handshake 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.