§ The result
1 point separates RecruitBot and Turing.
RecruitBot holds a 1-point edge over Turing under rubric v1.0, 37 to 36, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. RecruitBot leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Turing leads 2, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Turing takes Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20%, RecruitBot 33 to Turing 42, 63% of the weighted advantage Turing holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Post-Market Monitoring, RecruitBot 40 to Turing 27.
Vendor profile
RecruitBot
RecruitBot is an AI sourcing platform that searches a proprietary database of 655M+ candidate profiles, re-ranks results with machine learning trained on each recruiter's star ratings, and automates personalized email outreach.
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
RecruitBot 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 and NYC LL 144. Only Turing is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | RecruitBot | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
RecruitBot 33 · Turing 42
1.8 weighted points to Turing
12% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
RecruitBot 40 · Turing 27
1.6 weighted points to RecruitBot
18% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
RecruitBot 22 · Turing 28
1.1 weighted points to Turing
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
RecruitBot 48 · Turing 44
0.6 weighted points to RecruitBot
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
RecruitBot 50 · Turing 45
0.6 weighted points to RecruitBot
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
RecruitBot 55 · Turing 48
0.6 weighted points to RecruitBot
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
RecruitBot 27 · Turing 25
0.3 weighted points to RecruitBot
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.5 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 +0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is RecruitBot minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | RecruitBot | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 42 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 28 | -6 | -1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 27 | 25 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 44 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 27 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 36 (F) | +1 | +0.7 |
§ 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 | RecruitBot | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
RecruitBot has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 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 RecruitBot sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for RecruitBot, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- RecruitBot 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.
§ Where next