§ The result
Maki People leads Jack & Jill on all 7 criteria.
Maki People finishes 18 points clear of Jack & Jill under rubric v1.0 — 67 (D) against 49 (F) — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Maki People leads every one of the 7 criteria, Jack & Jill none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Jack & Jill 48 to Maki People 55. The advantage Maki People holds is spread out: FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Jack & Jill 28, Maki People 62, 15% weight), yet it supplies only 28% of the weighted points Maki People gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Jack & Jill
Jack & Jill is a London AI recruiting marketplace. Its free career agent, Jack, interviews and profiles candidates, and its employer-side AI recruiter, Jill, turns a role brief into a scoring rubric, ranks candidates from Jack's network (and optionally public profiles) with a percentage match, and arranges introductions only when both sides agree.
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
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Maki People under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Maki People is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Jack & Jill | Maki People |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | FR |
| Founded | 2025 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 28% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · Maki People 62
5.1 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · Maki People 64
4.0 weighted points to Maki People
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · Maki People 80
3.2 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Maki People 64
2.4 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Maki People 74
1.4 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · Maki People 66
1.0 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Maki People 55
0.8 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -18.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -18 beside that -18.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Maki People.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Maki People | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 64 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 80 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 62 | -34 | -5.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 64 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 74 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 67 (D) | -18 | -18.0 |
§ 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 | Jack & Jill | Maki People | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 25 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 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 Jack & Jill and Maki People sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 31 for Maki People, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill 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.
§ Where next