§ The result
HiPeople leads HiBob by 15 points.
Under rubric v1.0, HiPeople (Assessment) opens a 15-point lead on HiBob (ATS-integrated), 61 (D) to 46 (F). The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of HiPeople, with 1 level: HiPeople is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HiBob on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HiBob 20, HiPeople 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 77% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiBob
HiBob's Bob is an all-in-one HR platform whose Bob Hiring applicant tracking module uses AI to give each application an explainable match score against recruiter-defined criteria (AI CV Matching) and to draft job descriptions, interview scorecards and candidate emails.
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
HiBob 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 | HiBob | HiPeople |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | DE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiBob 20 · HiPeople 84
11.5 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiBob 47 · HiPeople 60
1.6 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiBob 55 · HiPeople 62
1.4 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiBob 61 · HiPeople 66
0.4 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiBob 57 · HiPeople 58
0.1 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiBob 63 · HiPeople 62
0.1 weighted points to HiBob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -14.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 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 -14.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiBob minus HiPeople.
| Category | Weight | HiBob | HiPeople | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 84 | -64 | -11.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 62 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 60 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 61 | 66 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 61 (D) | -15 | -14.9 |
§ 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 | HiBob | HiPeople | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 6 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 29 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HiBob has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 29 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 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for HiBob, across 4 distinct source domains, and 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiBob 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