§ The result
HiPeople leads Manatal on all 7 criteria.
HiPeople finishes 20 points clear of Manatal under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 41 (F) — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. HiPeople leads every one of the 7 criteria, Manatal none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, HiPeople 35 to Manatal 33. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HiPeople 84, Manatal 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Manatal
Cloud-based applicant tracking system and recruitment CRM for agencies and HR teams, featuring an AI engine that scores and ranks candidates against job requirements and an asynchronous AI video Interviewer.
§ The record
HiPeople is filed under Assessment AI, Manatal under ATS-integrated 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 | HiPeople | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | DE | TH |
| Founded | 2019 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiPeople 84 · Manatal 22
11.2 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiPeople 62 · Manatal 33
5.8 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiPeople 60 · Manatal 43
2.0 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiPeople 58 · Manatal 52
0.9 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiPeople 66 · Manatal 62
0.3 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiPeople 35 · Manatal 33
0.3 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiPeople 62 · Manatal 60
0.2 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +20.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +20 beside that +20.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiPeople minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | HiPeople | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 33 | +29 | +5.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 22 | +62 | +11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 43 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 41 (F) | +20 | +20.8 |
§ 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 | HiPeople | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 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 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Manatal 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