§ The result
HiPeople leads RippleMatch on all 7 criteria.
HiPeople finishes 15 points clear of RippleMatch under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 46 (F) — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. HiPeople takes all 7 criteria and RippleMatch none of them; the nearest contest is Human Oversight Design, HiPeople 62 to RippleMatch 57. The advantage HiPeople holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (HiPeople 84, RippleMatch 53, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 37% of the weighted points HiPeople gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
RippleMatch
RippleMatch is an early-career recruiting platform that sources students and recent graduates for employers' roles, ranks applicants with a 0-100 Fit Score built from criteria the recruiter configures, and adds verified skill badges, applicant review, interview scheduling and campus-event tools.
§ The record
HiPeople is filed under Assessment AI, RippleMatch under Candidate sourcing 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 | RippleMatch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiPeople 84 · RippleMatch 53
5.6 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiPeople 62 · RippleMatch 46
3.2 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiPeople 60 · RippleMatch 37
2.8 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiPeople 35 · RippleMatch 27
1.2 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiPeople 58 · RippleMatch 50
1.2 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiPeople 62 · RippleMatch 57
0.6 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiPeople 66 · RippleMatch 60
0.5 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.0 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 +15.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiPeople minus RippleMatch.
| Category | Weight | HiPeople | RippleMatch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 46 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 53 | +31 | +5.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 57 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 37 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 60 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 46 (F) | +15 | +15.0 |
§ 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 | RippleMatch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 35 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; RippleMatch has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiPeople and RippleMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for RippleMatch, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- RippleMatch last reviewed
- September 25, 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