§ The result
1 point separates Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and Tenzo AI.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds a 1-point edge over Tenzo AI under rubric v1.0, 57 to 56, across the Sourcing and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of Juicebox (PeopleGPT): Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Tenzo AI on Human Oversight Design. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52, Tenzo AI 45), which is 48% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Human Oversight Design, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 to Tenzo AI 60.
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
Tenzo AI
Tenzo AI's AI recruiter, Morgan, screens and interviews applicants by phone, SMS, email, WhatsApp or video in 40+ languages, scores them against employer-defined rubrics with fraud and identity checks, schedules next rounds, and writes scores, transcripts and recordings back to the customer's ATS.
§ The record
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Tenzo AI 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. Only Tenzo AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Tenzo AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2024 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Tenzo AI 45
1.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · Tenzo AI 60
1.2 weighted points to Tenzo AI
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Tenzo AI 45
1.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Tenzo AI 40
0.8 weighted points to Tenzo AI
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · Tenzo AI 83
0.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Tenzo AI 62
0.2 weighted points to Tenzo AI
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Tenzo AI 55
0.1 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.0 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 +0.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Tenzo AI.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Tenzo AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 83 | +1 | +0.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 56 (F) | +1 | +0.8 |
§ 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) | Tenzo AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 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 | 5 | 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 | 30 | 4 | 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; Tenzo AI has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and Tenzo AI 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 Tenzo AI, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tenzo AI 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.
§ Where next