§ The result
Metaview leads Mercor on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 separates Metaview and Mercor, both Screening entries, by 31 points: 54 for Metaview, 23 for Mercor. Metaview leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Mercor leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Mercor 10, Metaview 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage Metaview holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Mercor
Mercor is an AI talent platform that runs automated 20-minute AI video interviews and semantic resume/profile matching to vet, score, and place candidates and expert contractors, and offers an enterprise applicant-screening product that scores employers' applicant pools against role rubrics with pass/fail recommendations.
Vendor profile
Metaview
Metaview is an AI recruiting platform whose agents transcribe and summarize interviews into structured notes and scorecards, and whose Application Review feature screens and ranks inbound applicants against an auto-generated Ideal Candidate Profile with fit ratings.
§ The record
Mercor and Metaview are both filed under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Mercor | Metaview |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2023 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Mercor 10 · Metaview 80
12.6 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Mercor 22 · Metaview 60
5.7 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Mercor 20 · Metaview 48
3.4 weighted points to Metaview
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Mercor 22 · Metaview 38
3.2 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Mercor 42 · Metaview 60
2.2 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Mercor 20 · Metaview 33
1.9 weighted points to Metaview
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Mercor 40 · Metaview 62
1.8 weighted points to Metaview
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -30.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 30.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -31 beside that -30.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Mercor minus Metaview.
| Category | Weight | Mercor | Metaview | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 22 | 38 | -16 | -3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 10 | 80 | -70 | -12.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 33 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 22 | 60 | -38 | -5.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 60 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 20 | 48 | -28 | -3.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 62 | -22 | -1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 23 (F) | 54 (F) | -31 | -30.7 |
§ 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 | Mercor | Metaview | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 2 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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% | 10 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Mercor has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Metaview has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Metaview sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 32 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Mercor, across 4 distinct source domains, and 16 for Metaview, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Mercor last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Metaview 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