Metaview vs Maki, two interview copilots built from opposite ends
Metaview vs Maki is the closest pair on this list: both run an AI voice screen and both sit in your interviews. Choose Maki if you are an enterprise that needs skills assessments, EU hosting and audited scoring. Choose Metaview if you want to start self serve, add sourcing, and pay per user.
Metaview vs Maki, side by side
Product names differ, so each row maps one job to the product that does it. All cells come from the vendors' own pages, read on 5 October 2026.
| What you are comparing | Metaview | Maki |
|---|---|---|
| Help in interviews your team runs | Notetaker for video, phone and in person calls; fills ATS scorecards and cuts video snippets | Tomo, a copilot that joins Zoom, Teams or Meet, keeps the plan live and flags time per competency |
| AI voice screen | Screening agent in a web or mobile browser, 18 languages listed | Mochi, by web call or phone, with callbacks and SMS follow ups; 45+ languages on its homepage |
| How screens are scored | Against your rubric; the agent learns from your decisions | Evidence scored on a fixed behaviourally anchored grid, bias audited by Holistic AI |
| Skills tests | Code shown in the screen for candidates to explain aloud | Shiro across 300+ skills and Ken, a deep assessment across 400+ |
| Sourcing | An agent that searches the web from an intake call or brief | Not described; Maki's workflow begins at intake and runs from an ATS stage |
| Hosting and setup | AWS UK hosting; most teams live the same day | EU data residency by default; integrated and live in under 2 months |
| Pricing model | Per user monthly tiers by agent, a free plan, enterprise by quote | No licences: credits per candidate interaction for each agent, quoted on request |
Metaview publishes plan figures, which are left out here on purpose. Maki publishes none.
Why two similar products feel different
Metaview started as a notetaker for recruiters and worked outward, adding sourcing, application review and a screening agent. It is built for speed of adoption: sign up with a work email, connect your tools, run a search the same day. Its screening agent is one of several agents you can switch on.
Maki started from assessment science and worked toward the interview. Its homepage describes five stages from intake to a hire recommendation, each scored against competencies set at intake. Rollout runs through contracting, privacy review and configuration, and its pages lean on audits, the EU AI Act and proof that scores track job performance.
Choose Metaview if, choose Maki if
Five buyers who end up with both on a shortlist, and the product each should start with.
A bank hiring graduates across France and Germany needs scoring it can defend to works councils.
Maki. It hosts in the EU by default, publishes bias audits under NYC Local Law 144, and scores on a fixed grid.
Ask for the audit reports and the validation study for your role family.
A 200 person software company wants better interview notes by next week.
Metaview. Connect a calendar and the notetaker joins scheduled interviews, with a free notes plan to start.
Check which interview platforms and ATS you use are on its list.
Hiring managers ramble, run out of time and skip half the competencies.
Maki's Tomo keeps the plan on screen, warns when time is short on a competency and suggests follow ups.
Metaview reports on question coverage and talk time after the fact.
The applicant flow is thin and the team must find people as well as screen them.
Metaview. Its sourcing agent searches the web from your brief. Maki's pages describe no sourcing.
Ask how Metaview gets contact details for the profiles it finds.
A retailer screens thousands of store applicants a month in several languages.
Either. Mochi reaches people by phone or web with callbacks; Metaview's agent runs on any phone browser.
Pilot both on the same role and compare completion and score spread.
Metaview vs Maki at a glance
- Both offer an AI voice screen and an AI that sits in human interviews
- Maki adds skills assessments, audited fixed grid scoring and EU hosting by default
- Metaview adds sourcing, self serve sign up and per user plans with a free tier
- Maki can move passing candidates forward automatically; Metaview leaves every progression to a person
Questions your procurement and legal teams will ask
Enterprise buyers comparing these two usually stall on the same points. Get written answers to these from both before a pilot.
- Where is candidate audio stored, and can we choose the region?
- How long are recordings kept by default, and who can delete them?
- Which independent bias audit covers the screening agent we would use?
- Can any candidate be rejected or advanced without a human decision?
- What exactly writes back to our ATS after each screen?
- How is usage counted, per user or per candidate interaction?
- How long from signature to the first live candidate?
If you want a video interview and sourcing together
Criteria are set once per role and every interview is scored against them, 1 to 5.
Both products here screen by voice. The Cognitive runs a live, two way AI video interview of 10 or 20 minutes at a slot the candidate books, with a score per criterion, overall written feedback, the transcript and the recording. It also sources from ~900M public profiles with verified emails and phones.
Keep reading
Metaview review · Metaview alternatives · Maki review · Maki alternatives
How this was checked
Metaview facts come from metaview.ai and its pricing, screening, sourcing, notes and integrations pages. Maki facts come from makipeople.com and its pricing, Mochi and integrations pages. All were read on 5 October 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Is Maki better than Metaview?
For enterprises that need validated assessments, audited scoring and EU hosting, Maki is built around those requirements. For teams that want to start quickly, add AI sourcing and pay per user, Metaview fits better. Both cover the core pair of a voice screen and help in human interviews.
Metaview vs Maki pricing: how does each charge?
Metaview publishes per user monthly tiers for each agent, with a free plan, and quotes enterprise. Maki publishes no figures: it charges credits per candidate interaction for each agent rather than licences, alongside an enterprise platform, and quotes on request.
How is Tomo different from Metaview's notetaker?
Tomo works during the interview. It keeps a structured plan in front of the interviewer, flags when time is short on a competency and surfaces moments to follow up. Metaview's notetaker focuses on capture and output: notes, filled scorecards, snippets and reports, plus a botless option and phone calls through its switchboard.
Mochi vs Metaview screening: which is better for volume?
Both are built for it. Mochi runs by web or phone, makes automatic callbacks and sends SMS follow ups when candidates drop off. Metaview's agent runs in any browser on any device whenever the candidate is ready, with role plays and code questions. Pilot both on one role and compare completion.
Do Maki and Metaview reject candidates automatically?
Metaview says only a human ever decides who to progress or reject. Maki says no candidate is ever automatically rejected, but its integrations page describes auto progression, where candidates meeting your criteria move forward on their own. Decide whether you want that switched on.
Which ATS do Metaview and Maki support?
Maki says it works with 30+ ATS and HR systems and names native integrations with SAP SuccessFactors, iCIMS and Workday. Metaview lists more than 100 ATS by name, including Greenhouse, Workday, iCIMS and SAP SuccessFactors. Ask each what writes back after a screen.
Does Maki do sourcing like Metaview?
No sourcing is described on the Maki pages read on 5 October 2026. Its workflow starts at intake and its agents are triggered from an ATS stage, so candidates come from your existing applicant flow. Metaview's sourcing agent searches the web from your brief or intake call.
Explore: Metaview review · Metaview alternatives · Maki review · Maki alternatives