§ The result
Avature leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Avature sits 12 points above Turing under rubric v1.0 — 48 against 36 — with Avature filed under ATS-integrated and Turing under Assessment. Avature is ahead of Turing on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being FRIA Support at Avature 32 to Turing 25. Human Oversight Design is the widest raw gap (Avature 60, Turing 45) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Avature 55, Turing 42), 21% of the weighted advantage Avature builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Avature
Avature is an enterprise talent acquisition and talent management platform (recruiting CRM, ATS, onboarding and internal mobility) with built-in AI for semantic search, explainable weighted candidate matching and ranking, candidate fraud detection and configurable recruiting agents.
Vendor profile
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Avature is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Avature | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2004 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 21% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Avature 55 · Turing 42
2.6 weighted points to Avature
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Avature 40 · Turing 28
2.2 weighted points to Avature
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Avature 58 · Turing 44
2.1 weighted points to Avature
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Avature 60 · Turing 45
1.8 weighted points to Avature
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Avature 40 · Turing 27
1.6 weighted points to Avature
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Avature 32 · Turing 25
1.1 weighted points to Avature
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Avature 60 · Turing 48
1.0 weighted points to Avature
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Avature minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Avature | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 44 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 27 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 36 (F) | +12 | +12.2 |
§ 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 | Avature | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Avature has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Avature sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Avature, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Avature last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 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