§ The result
HiPeople leads Oleeo on all 7 criteria.
HiPeople finishes 21 points clear of Oleeo under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 40 (F) — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. HiPeople leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Oleeo leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HiPeople 84, Oleeo 40, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 38% 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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
HiPeople is filed under Assessment AI, Oleeo 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 and Colorado AI Act. Only HiPeople is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HiPeople | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiPeople 84 · Oleeo 40
7.9 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiPeople 62 · Oleeo 40
4.4 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiPeople 60 · Oleeo 30
3.6 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiPeople 58 · Oleeo 45
1.9 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiPeople 35 · Oleeo 25
1.5 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiPeople 66 · Oleeo 55
0.9 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiPeople 62 · Oleeo 55
0.8 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +21.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 21.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +21 beside that +21.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiPeople minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | HiPeople | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 40 | +44 | +7.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 30 | +30 | +3.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +0.9 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 40 (F) | +21 | +21.1 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 6 | 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; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 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 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo last reviewed
- June 7, 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