§ The result
Maki People leads Tengai on all 7 criteria.
Maki People (Assessment) and Tengai (Screening) are 25 points apart under rubric v1.0, 67 (D) for Maki People against 42 (F) for Tengai. Tengai leads none of the 7 criteria, and Maki People is ahead on 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them. 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, Tengai 33, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 34% 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
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
Maki People is filed under Assessment AI, Tengai under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Maki People | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | SE |
| Founded | 2021 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Maki People 80 · Tengai 33
8.5 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 55% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Maki People 62 · Tengai 28
5.1 weighted points to Maki People
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Maki People 64 · Tengai 45
3.8 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Maki People 55 · Tengai 33
2.6 weighted points to Maki People
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Maki People 64 · Tengai 50
2.1 weighted points to Maki People
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Maki People 74 · Tengai 55
1.5 weighted points to Maki People
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Maki People 66 · Tengai 58
1.0 weighted points to Maki People
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +24.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +25 beside that +24.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Maki People minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | Maki People | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 64 | 45 | +19 | +3.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 33 | +47 | +8.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 62 | 28 | +34 | +5.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 50 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 33 | +22 | +2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 74 | 55 | +19 | +1.5 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 42 (F) | +25 | +24.6 |
§ 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 | Maki People | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 37 | 5 | 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; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Maki People and Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Maki People, across 5 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Maki People last reviewed
- September 8, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai 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