§ The result
1 point separates Sense and Juicebox (PeopleGPT).
Sense (Screening) edges Juicebox (PeopleGPT) (Sourcing) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 58 to 57. Sense leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Human Oversight Design, while Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Juicebox (PeopleGPT) takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 to Sense 72, 86% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Human Oversight Design, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 to Sense 64.
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
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
§ The record
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Sense under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · Sense 72
2.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · Sense 64
1.7 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Sense 60
1.6 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Sense 38
0.4 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Sense 52
0.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Sense 58
0.3 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Sense 62
0.2 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.7 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 -1.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Sense.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 72 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 64 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 58 (F) | -1 | -1.7 |
§ 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 | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 3 | Audit 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; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sense 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