§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Cornerstone OnDemand finishes 20 points clear of Turing under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 36 — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Cornerstone OnDemand leads every one of the 7 criteria, Turing none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, Cornerstone OnDemand 35 to Turing 25. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Cornerstone OnDemand 72, Turing 42, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 31% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
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
Cornerstone OnDemand 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, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1999 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Turing 42
6.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Turing 28
5.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Turing 44
2.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Turing 27
2.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Turing 25
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Turing 45
1.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Turing 48
1.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +19.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +20 beside that +19.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 42 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 28 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 44 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 27 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 36 (F) | +20 | +19.6 |
§ 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 | Cornerstone OnDemand | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 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 Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 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