§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads Breezy HR by 14 points.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sits 14 points above Breezy HR under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 43 — with Juicebox (PeopleGPT) filed under Sourcing and Breezy HR under ATS-integrated. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Breezy HR leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Breezy HR 25, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 75% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Breezy HR
Breezy HR is an SMB-focused applicant tracking system with a drag-and-drop hiring pipeline, multi-board job distribution, scorecards and interview scheduling, plus a credit-metered AI add-on ("Breezy Intelligence") that scores and ranks applicants against job requirements, audits resumes for AI-generated content, and summarizes candidate activity.
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
Breezy HR is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Breezy HR | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Breezy HR 25 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84
10.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Breezy HR 38 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55
2.0 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Breezy HR 30 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35
0.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Breezy HR 55 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50
0.6 weighted points to Breezy HR
20% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Breezy HR 50 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52
0.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Breezy HR 58 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60
0.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Breezy HR 55 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56
0.1 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -13.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Breezy HR minus Juicebox (PeopleGPT).
| Category | Weight | Breezy HR | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 84 | -59 | -10.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 57 (F) | -14 | -13.5 |
§ 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 | Breezy HR | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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% | 23 | 9 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Breezy HR has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 9 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 Breezy HR and Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Breezy HR, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Breezy HR last reviewed
- August 2, 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