§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads Talogy by 15 points.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) finishes 15 points clear of Talogy under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 42 — across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Talogy leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84, Talogy 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 66% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 5 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
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Talogy 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 Talogy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · Talogy 30
9.7 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Talogy 32
2.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Talogy 25
1.5 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Talogy 52
0.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · Talogy 52
0.2 weighted points to Talogy
20% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Talogy 53
0.2 weighted points to Talogy
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Talogy 58
0.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +14.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 53 | -1 | -0.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 30 | +54 | +9.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 32 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 42 (F) | +15 | +14.3 |
§ 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) | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy 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