§ The result
Darwinbox leads Turing on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Darwinbox sits 10 points above Turing under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 36 — with Darwinbox filed under ATS-integrated and Turing under Assessment. Darwinbox leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Turing is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Darwinbox leads is FRIA Support, Darwinbox 30 to Turing 25. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Darwinbox 60, Turing 42, 20% weight), is only 39% of the weighted advantage Darwinbox builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
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
Darwinbox 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 | Darwinbox | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · Turing 42
3.6 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · Turing 44
2.1 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · Turing 45
1.2 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · Turing 27
1.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · Turing 25
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · Turing 48
0.7 weighted points to Darwinbox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +9.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 42 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 44 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 48 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 36 (F) | +10 | +9.3 |
§ 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 | Darwinbox | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 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% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 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 Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox 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