§ The result
Metaview leads isolved by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Metaview, filed under Screening, finishes on 54 and isolved, filed under ATS-integrated, on 47, 7 points apart. Metaview leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while isolved leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — isolved 45, Metaview 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 70% of the weighted advantage Metaview holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
Vendor profile
Metaview
Metaview is an AI recruiting platform whose agents transcribe and summarize interviews into structured notes and scorecards, and whose Application Review feature screens and ranks inbound applicants against an auto-generated Ideal Candidate Profile with fit ratings.
§ The record
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Metaview under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Metaview is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | isolved | Metaview |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1986 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Metaview 80
6.3 weighted points to Metaview
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Metaview 38
2.4 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · Metaview 60
1.1 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
isolved 55 · Metaview 60
0.6 weighted points to Metaview
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Metaview 62
0.5 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · Metaview 33
0.4 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Metaview 48
0.1 weighted points to Metaview
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Metaview.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Metaview | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 80 | -35 | -6.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 60 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 48 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 62 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 54 (F) | -7 | -6.6 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | isolved | Metaview | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Metaview has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved and Metaview sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 16 for Metaview, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Metaview 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