§ The result
Maki People leads HiringBranch by 10 points.
Maki People sits 10 points above HiringBranch under rubric v1.0, 62 (D) against 52 (F), with both filed under Assessment. Maki People leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while HiringBranch leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: FRIA Support (HiringBranch 35, Maki People 57) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (HiringBranch 60, Maki People 80), the second being 35% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiringBranch
HiringBranch is an AI skills-assessment platform that measures 50+ communication and soft skills from candidates' open-ended, conversational job-simulation responses (text and voice) to screen and rank applicants for customer-facing roles.
Vendor profile
Maki People
Maki People is a Paris-based AI hiring platform whose core product is pre-hire assessment and screening of candidate skills, behaviors, and situational judgement at high volume, extended with conversational AI agents for screening, interview support, and scheduling.
§ The record
HiringBranch and Maki People are both filed under Assessment 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 | HiringBranch | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | CA | FR |
| Founded | 2014 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiringBranch 60 · Maki People 80
3.6 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiringBranch 35 · Maki People 57
3.3 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiringBranch 40 · Maki People 52
1.4 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiringBranch 55 · Maki People 62
1.1 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiringBranch 64 · Maki People 70
0.5 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiringBranch 60 · Maki People 62
0.4 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiringBranch 52 · Maki People 50
0.2 weighted points to HiringBranch
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiringBranch minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | HiringBranch | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 60 | 80 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 57 | -22 | -3.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 70 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 62 (D) | -10 | -10.0 |
§ 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 | HiringBranch | Maki People | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HiringBranch has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Maki People has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 5 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 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for HiringBranch, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiringBranch last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Maki People 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