§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads Personio on all 7 criteria.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) finishes 17 points clear of Personio under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 40 — across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads every one of the 7 criteria, Personio none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 to Personio 48. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84, Personio 25 — and at an 18% weight it carries 65% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Personio under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2022 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · Personio 25
10.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Personio 40
2.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Personio 48
0.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Personio 50
0.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Personio 30
0.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Personio 52
0.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · Personio 48
0.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +16.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +17 beside that +16.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 25 | +59 | +10.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 40 (F) | +17 | +16.3 |
§ 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 | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 8 | Sources 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; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 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