Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs Turing
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.
Concerning
ATS-integrated
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
Greenhouse leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Turing (Assessment) are 31 points apart under rubric v1.0, 67 (D) for Greenhouse against 36 (F) for Turing. Turing leads none of the 7 criteria, and Greenhouse is ahead on 5 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them. 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.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse7
- Turing0
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency86 vs 28
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of
Only Turing is in scope of
| 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.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight34% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86Turing2810.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight57% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78Turing427.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight70% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58Turing273.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight79% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Turing443.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight88% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42Turing252.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight96% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66Turing452.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Turing481.3 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, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| 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% | 67D | 36F | +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.