§ The result
Metaview leads micro1 by 18 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Metaview opens an 18-point lead on micro1, 54 to 36, with both scored in the Screening cohort. micro1 takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 6 for Metaview, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Metaview 80, micro1 20) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 53% of the weighted advantage Metaview holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
Metaview and micro1 are both filed under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Assessment.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Metaview | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Metaview 80 · micro1 20
10.8 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Metaview 48 · micro1 25
2.8 weighted points to Metaview
20% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Metaview 38 · micro1 50
2.4 weighted points to micro1
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Metaview 60 · micro1 45
2.3 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Metaview 33 · micro1 22
1.6 weighted points to Metaview
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Metaview 60 · micro1 48
1.4 weighted points to Metaview
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Metaview 62 · micro1 45
1.4 weighted points to Metaview
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +17.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +18 beside that +17.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Metaview minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | Metaview | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 20 | +60 | +10.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 22 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 25 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 36 (F) | +18 | +17.9 |
§ 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 | Metaview | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 25 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Metaview has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Metaview and micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Metaview, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Metaview last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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