§ The result
Maki People leads Personio on all 7 criteria.
Maki People finishes 22 points clear of Personio under rubric v1.0 — 62 (D) against 40 (F) — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Maki People leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Personio leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Maki People 80, Personio 25 — and at an 18% weight it carries 45% 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
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Maki People is filed under Assessment AI, Personio under ATS-integrated 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 | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | DE |
| Founded | 2021 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Maki People 80 · Personio 25
9.9 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Maki People 62 · Personio 40
4.4 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Maki People 57 · Personio 30
4.0 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Maki People 70 · Personio 50
1.6 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Maki People 62 · Personio 52
1.5 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Maki People 52 · Personio 48
0.5 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Maki People 50 · Personio 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 +22.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +22 beside that +22.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Maki People minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Maki People | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 25 | +55 | +9.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 57 | 30 | +27 | +4.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 48 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 70 | 50 | +20 | +1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 62 (D) | 40 (F) | +22 | +22.2 |
§ 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 | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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% | 17 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Maki People has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Maki People and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Maki People, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Maki People last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 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