Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
micro1 vs Turing
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
Substantial gaps
Screening
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
micro1 and Turing tie at 36.
micro1, filed under Screening, and Turing, filed under Assessment, tie at 36 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. micro1 leads 3 of the 7 criteria and Turing 4, yet the two totals land on the same number. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — micro1 50, Turing 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 76% of the weighted advantage micro1 holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- micro13
- Turing4
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation50 vs 42
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
micro1 is filed under Screening AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | micro1 | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2018 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight36% of the movement so far
micro150Turing421.6 weighted points to micro1
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight68% of the movement so far
micro120Turing281.4 weighted points to Turing
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight78% of the movement so far
micro122Turing250.4 weighted points to Turing
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight86% of the movement so far
micro148Turing450.4 weighted points to micro1
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight91% of the movement so far
micro125Turing270.2 weighted points to Turing
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
micro145Turing480.2 weighted points to Turing
- 7
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
micro145Turing440.1 weighted points to micro1
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.3.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is micro1 minus Turing, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | micro1 | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 28 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 45 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 36F | 36F | - | -0.3 |
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 | micro1 | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 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 micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- micro1 last reviewed
- September 25, 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.