§ The result
Greenhouse leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 31 points between Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Turing (Assessment): 67 (D) for Greenhouse, 36 (F) for Turing. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 5 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Turing leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Greenhouse 86, Turing 28, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
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
Greenhouse 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 | Greenhouse | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · Turing 28
10.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · Turing 42
7.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · Turing 27
3.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · Turing 44
3.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · Turing 25
2.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · Turing 45
2.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · Turing 48
1.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +30.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 30.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +31 beside that +30.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 42 | +36 | +7.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 28 | +58 | +10.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 44 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 45 | +21 | +2.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 27 | +31 | +3.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 48 | +16 | +1.3 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 36 (F) | +31 | +30.7 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse 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