§ The result
Maki People leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 32 points between Maki People (Assessment) and Moonhub (Sourcing): 62 (D) for Maki People, 30 (F) for Moonhub. Maki People leads every one of the 7 criteria and 6 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Moonhub leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Maki People 80, Moonhub 18, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage Maki People holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Maki People is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Maki People is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Maki People | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 2021 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Maki People 80 · Moonhub 18
11.2 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Maki People 62 · Moonhub 30
6.4 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Maki People 57 · Moonhub 25
4.8 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Maki People 52 · Moonhub 22
3.6 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Maki People 62 · Moonhub 40
3.3 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Maki People 70 · Moonhub 38
2.6 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Maki People 50 · Moonhub 48
0.2 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +32.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 32.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +32 beside that +32.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Maki People minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Maki People | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 30 | +32 | +6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 18 | +62 | +11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 57 | 25 | +32 | +4.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +3.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 22 | +30 | +3.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 70 | 38 | +32 | +2.6 |
| Total | 100% | 62 (D) | 30 (F) | +32 | +32.1 |
§ 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 | Maki People | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Maki People has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 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 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Maki People last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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