§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) takes the total, iMocha takes more of the criteria.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) (Sourcing) edges iMocha (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 57 to 56. iMocha leads more of the criteria than Juicebox (PeopleGPT) — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Juicebox (PeopleGPT). Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — iMocha 44, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 90% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
Vendor profile
Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is an AI talent-sourcing search engine that lets recruiters find, rank, and reach candidates across 800M+ public profiles using natural-language queries instead of Boolean search, with an "Autopilot" agent that scores and ranks profiles against job criteria.
§ The record
iMocha is filed under Assessment AI, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only iMocha is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | iMocha | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iMocha 44 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84
7.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
iMocha 68 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52
3.2 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
iMocha 64 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50
1.7 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iMocha 66 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56
1.5 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iMocha 48 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55
0.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iMocha 66 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60
0.5 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iMocha 38 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35
0.4 weighted points to iMocha
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iMocha minus Juicebox (PeopleGPT).
| Category | Weight | iMocha | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 52 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 44 | 84 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 66 | 56 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 50 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 60 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 57 (F) | -1 | -0.7 |
§ 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 | iMocha | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Juicebox (PeopleGPT) has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha and Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iMocha last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 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