§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) takes the total, Sova Assessment takes more of the criteria.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) scores 57 and Sova Assessment 48 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Sova Assessment leads more of the criteria than Juicebox (PeopleGPT) — 4 to 3 — 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 — Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84, Sova Assessment 38 — and at an 18% weight it carries 78% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 3 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
Sova Assessment
Sova Assessment is a UK-based enterprise talent assessment platform combining personality questionnaires, cognitive and ability tests, situational judgement, video interviews, virtual assessment centres and AI-led role simulations into a single occupational-psychology-validated candidate scoring workflow.
§ The record
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Sova Assessment under Assessment 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. Only Sova Assessment is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| 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 · Sova Assessment 38
8.3 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Sova Assessment 40
1.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Sova Assessment 40
0.8 weighted points to Sova Assessment
20% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Sova Assessment 55
0.6 weighted points to Sova Assessment
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Sova Assessment 52
0.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · Sova Assessment 55
0.6 weighted points to Sova Assessment
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Sova Assessment 62
0.2 weighted points to Sova Assessment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +8.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 38 | +46 | +8.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 48 (F) | +9 | +8.6 |
§ 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) | Sova Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 8 | 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; Sova Assessment has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and Sova Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sova Assessment 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