§ The result
2 points separate Metaview and Phenom.
Metaview (Screening) edges Phenom (Sourcing) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 54 to 52. Metaview leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Phenom leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 2 are level. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Phenom takes Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20%, Metaview 38 to Phenom 55, 100% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Post-Market Monitoring, Metaview 48 to Phenom 30.
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
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
§ The record
Metaview is filed under Screening AI, Phenom under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Metaview is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Metaview | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Metaview 38 · Phenom 55
3.4 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Metaview 48 · Phenom 30
2.2 weighted points to Metaview
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Metaview 33 · Phenom 25
1.2 weighted points to Metaview
18% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Metaview 80 · Phenom 75
0.9 weighted points to Metaview
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Metaview 62 · Phenom 55
0.6 weighted points to Metaview
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +1.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +1.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Metaview minus Phenom.
| Category | Weight | Metaview | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 75 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 25 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 52 (F) | +2 | +1.4 |
§ 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 | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Metaview has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 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 26 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Metaview, across 2 distinct source domains, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Metaview last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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