§ The result
Maki People leads Prevue HR on all 7 criteria.
Maki People finishes 23 points clear of Prevue HR inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 67 (D) against 44 (F). Maki People takes all 7 criteria and Prevue HR none of them; the nearest contest is Human Oversight Design, Maki People 66 to Prevue HR 54. The advantage Maki People holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Maki People 80, Prevue HR 44, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 29% of the weighted points Maki People gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Prevue HR
Prevue HR's psychometric platform tests candidates' aptitude, personality and motivations and compares the results with a custom role benchmark to produce a percentage Job Suitability score and Job-Fit report, alongside an optional applicant tracking system (APS Pro).
§ The record
Maki People and Prevue HR are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Maki People | Prevue HR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | CA |
| Founded | 2021 | 1994 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Maki People 80 · Prevue HR 44
6.5 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Maki People 62 · Prevue HR 27
5.3 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Maki People 64 · Prevue HR 45
3.8 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Maki People 64 · Prevue HR 48
2.4 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Maki People 55 · Prevue HR 40
1.8 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Maki People 66 · Prevue HR 54
1.4 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Maki People 74 · Prevue HR 58
1.3 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +22.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +23 beside that +22.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Maki People minus Prevue HR.
| Category | Weight | Maki People | Prevue HR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 64 | 45 | +19 | +3.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 44 | +36 | +6.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 62 | 27 | +35 | +5.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 48 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 54 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 74 | 58 | +16 | +1.3 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 44 (F) | +23 | +22.5 |
§ 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 | Prevue HR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Maki People has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Prevue HR has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Maki People and Prevue HR sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Maki People, across 5 distinct source domains, and 34 for Prevue HR, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Maki People last reviewed
- September 8, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Prevue HR last reviewed
- September 25, 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