§ The result
Gloat leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Gloat sits 11 points above Turing under rubric v1.0 — 47 against 36 — with Gloat filed under Sourcing and Turing under Assessment. Gloat 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 Gloat 28 to Turing 25. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Gloat 62, Turing 45) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Gloat 58, Turing 44), the second being 20% of the weighted advantage Gloat holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Gloat
Gloat is an AI-powered internal talent marketplace and "agentic HR" platform that matches an employer's existing employees to internal job openings, gigs, projects, mentorships, and learning based on inferred skills and career goals.
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
Gloat is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Gloat | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 20% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Gloat 58 · Turing 44
2.1 weighted points to Gloat
12% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Gloat 62 · Turing 45
2.0 weighted points to Gloat
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Gloat 38 · Turing 28
1.8 weighted points to Gloat
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Gloat 42 · Turing 27
1.8 weighted points to Gloat
20% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Gloat 48 · Turing 42
1.2 weighted points to Gloat
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Gloat 62 · Turing 48
1.1 weighted points to Gloat
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Gloat 28 · Turing 25
0.4 weighted points to Gloat
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +10.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Gloat minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Gloat | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 28 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 44 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 27 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 36 (F) | +11 | +10.5 |
§ 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 | Gloat | 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% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 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% | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Gloat has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 8 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 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Gloat, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 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