HomeCompareJuicebox (PeopleGPT) vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Juicebox (PeopleGPT) vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and LinkedIn Recruiter tie at 57.

Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and LinkedIn Recruiter tie at 57 under rubric v1.0 inside the Sourcing cohort, arriving there from different criteria. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads 2 of the 7 criteria and LinkedIn Recruiter 5, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84, LinkedIn Recruiter 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 91% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 2 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and LinkedIn Recruiter are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.

RecordJuicebox (PeopleGPT)LinkedIn Recruiter
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20222002

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 45% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    6.1 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)

  2. 20% weight · 67% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · LinkedIn Recruiter 67

    3.0 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  3. 12% weight · 81% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · LinkedIn Recruiter 66

    1.9 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  4. 15% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · LinkedIn Recruiter 62

    0.9 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  5. 8% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · LinkedIn Recruiter 68

    0.6 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  6. 12% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    0.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)

  7. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · LinkedIn Recruiter 38

    0.4 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus LinkedIn Recruiter.

CategoryWeightJuicebox (PeopleGPT)LinkedIn RecruiterΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5267-15-3.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%8450+34+6.1
FRIA Support15%3538-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5662-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5066-16-1.9
Post-Market Monitoring12%5550+5+0.6
Customer Documentation8%6068-8-0.6
Total100%57 (F)57 (F)--0.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightJuicebox (PeopleGPT)LinkedIn Recruiter
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%11Sources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%30Audit reportSources on a separate domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%20Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%11Sources on a separate domain60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%20Audit reportSources on a separate domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%21Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%124Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain345Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Juicebox (PeopleGPT) has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; LinkedIn Recruiter has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and LinkedIn Recruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 39 for LinkedIn Recruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
LinkedIn Recruiter last reviewed
September 25, 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.