HomeCompareHireQuotient vs Maki People

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

HireQuotient vs Maki People

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Maki People leads HireQuotient on all 7 criteria.

Rubric v1.0 puts 33 points between Maki People (Assessment) and HireQuotient (Sourcing): 67 (D) for Maki People, 34 (F) for HireQuotient. Maki People leads every one of the 7 criteria and 6 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; HireQuotient leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (HireQuotient 18, Maki People 80, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

HireQuotient is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Maki People under Assessment AI. They also share 3 secondary categories: Screening, Scheduling and Video interview.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordHireQuotientMaki People
Price tierLowEnterprise
HeadquartersSGFR
Founded20212021

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 34% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    HireQuotient 18 · Maki People 80

    11.2 weighted points to Maki People

  2. 15% weight · 53% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    HireQuotient 22 · Maki People 62

    6.0 weighted points to Maki People

  3. 20% weight · 71% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    HireQuotient 35 · Maki People 64

    5.8 weighted points to Maki People

  4. 15% weight · 82% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    HireQuotient 40 · Maki People 64

    3.6 weighted points to Maki People

  5. 12% weight · 91% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    HireQuotient 30 · Maki People 55

    3.0 weighted points to Maki People

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    HireQuotient 50 · Maki People 74

    1.9 weighted points to Maki People

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    HireQuotient 57 · Maki People 66

    1.1 weighted points to Maki People

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -32.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 32.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -33 beside that -32.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is HireQuotient minus Maki People.

CategoryWeightHireQuotientMaki PeopleΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3564-29-5.8
Bias Audit Transparency18%1880-62-11.2
FRIA Support15%2262-40-6.0
Data Governance Disclosure15%4064-24-3.6
Human Oversight Design12%5766-9-1.1
Post-Market Monitoring12%3055-25-3.0
Customer Documentation8%5074-24-1.9
Total100%34 (F)67 (D)-33-32.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHireQuotientMaki People
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain40Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%60Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%245Sources on the vendor's own domain256Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Maki People has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for Maki People, across 5 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
HireQuotient last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Maki People last reviewed
September 8, 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.