§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) finishes 21 points clear of Turing under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 36 — across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads every one of the 7 criteria, Turing none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 to Turing 45. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84, Turing 28 — and at an 18% weight it carries 50% 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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Turing under Assessment 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 Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · Turing 28
10.1 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Turing 27
3.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Turing 42
2.0 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Turing 44
1.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Turing 25
1.5 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Turing 48
1.0 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50 · Turing 45
0.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +20.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +21 beside that +20.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 28 | +56 | +10.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 44 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 27 | +28 | +3.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 36 (F) | +21 | +20.3 |
§ 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) | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 8 | 7 | 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; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 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 30 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 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