HomeCompareCezanne Recruitment vs Turing

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cezanne Recruitment vs Turing

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Cezanne Recruitment leads Turing by 5 points.

Under rubric v1.0, Cezanne Recruitment, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 41 and Turing, filed under Assessment, on 36, 5 points apart. Turing takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Cezanne Recruitment, whose share includes Post-Market Monitoring. The advantage Cezanne Recruitment holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cezanne Recruitment 44, Turing 27, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 33% of the weighted points Cezanne Recruitment gains across the 5 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Cezanne Recruitment is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Turing under Assessment 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 Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCezanne RecruitmentTuring
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersGBUS
Founded20122018

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 12% weight · 28% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Cezanne Recruitment 44 · Turing 27

    2.0 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  2. 12% weight · 49% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Cezanne Recruitment 58 · Turing 45

    1.6 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  3. 15% weight · 69% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cezanne Recruitment 54 · Turing 44

    1.5 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  4. 18% weight · 79% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Cezanne Recruitment 24 · Turing 28

    0.7 weighted points to Turing

  5. 8% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cezanne Recruitment 57 · Turing 48

    0.7 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  6. 15% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cezanne Recruitment 28 · Turing 25

    0.4 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  7. 20% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cezanne Recruitment 40 · Turing 42

    0.4 weighted points to Turing

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.1.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cezanne Recruitment minus Turing.

CategoryWeightCezanne RecruitmentTuringΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4042-2-0.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%2428-4-0.7
FRIA Support15%2825+3+0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5444+10+1.5
Human Oversight Design12%5845+13+1.6
Post-Market Monitoring12%4427+17+2.0
Customer Documentation8%5748+9+0.7
Total100%41 (F)36 (F)+5+5.1

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCezanne RecruitmentTuring
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11—
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain01—
Data Governance Disclosure15%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain01—
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%256Sources on the vendor's own domain87Sources on the vendor's own domain

Cezanne Recruitment has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 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.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Cezanne Recruitment, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Cezanne Recruitment 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.