§ The result
Maki People leads Interviewer.AI by 15 points.
Maki People finishes 15 points clear of Interviewer.AI under rubric v1.0 — 62 (D) against 47 (F) — across the Assessment and Video interview cohorts. Maki People leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Interviewer.AI leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Interviewer.AI 35, Maki People 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
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
Interviewer.AI is filed under Video interview AI, Maki People under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| Record | Interviewer.AI | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | FR |
| Founded | 2018 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Interviewer.AI 35 · Maki People 80
8.1 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Interviewer.AI 35 · Maki People 57
3.3 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Interviewer.AI 32 · Maki People 52
2.4 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Interviewer.AI 52 · Maki People 62
2.0 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Interviewer.AI 60 · Maki People 50
1.2 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Interviewer.AI 58 · Maki People 70
1.0 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Interviewer.AI 60 · Maki People 62
0.3 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -15.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.3 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 -15.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Interviewer.AI minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | Interviewer.AI | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 80 | -45 | -8.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 57 | -22 | -3.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 52 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 70 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 62 (D) | -15 | -15.9 |
§ 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 | Interviewer.AI | 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Interviewer.AI last reviewed
- June 7, 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