§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads 365Talents by 11 points.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sits 11 points above 365Talents under rubric v1.0, 57 against 46, with both filed under Sourcing. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to 365Talents and Juicebox (PeopleGPT), with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds, headed by Bias Audit Transparency, settle the total. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — 365Talents 18, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 88% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
365Talents
365Talents is an AI skills-intelligence and internal talent-marketplace platform that infers employees' skills from HRIS records, CVs, documents and collaboration tools, then matches them to internal jobs, projects, gigs, mentors, learning and succession pipelines.
Vendor profile
Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is an AI talent-sourcing search engine that lets recruiters find, rank, and reach candidates across 800M+ public profiles using natural-language queries instead of Boolean search, with an "Autopilot" agent that scores and ranks profiles against job criteria.
§ The record
365Talents and Juicebox (PeopleGPT) are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only 365Talents is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | 365Talents | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
365Talents 18 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84
11.9 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
365Talents 63 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52
2.2 weighted points to 365Talents
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
365Talents 44 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55
1.3 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
365Talents 57 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50
0.8 weighted points to 365Talents
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
365Talents 58 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56
0.3 weighted points to 365Talents
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
365Talents 57 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60
0.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -10.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is 365Talents minus Juicebox (PeopleGPT).
| Category | Weight | 365Talents | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 84 | -66 | -11.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 57 (F) | -11 | -10.1 |
§ 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 | 365Talents | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
365Talents has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Juicebox (PeopleGPT) has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for 365Talents, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- 365Talents last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 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