§ The result
Sapia.ai leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Sapia.ai finishes 20 points clear of Turing inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 56 against 36. Sapia.ai leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Turing leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Sapia.ai 70, Turing 42, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 28% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
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
Sapia.ai and Turing are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Sapia.ai | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 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
Sapia.ai 70 · Turing 42
5.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sapia.ai 52 · Turing 28
4.3 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sapia.ai 50 · Turing 27
2.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sapia.ai 62 · Turing 44
2.7 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sapia.ai 62 · Turing 45
2.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sapia.ai 35 · Turing 25
1.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sapia.ai 62 · Turing 48
1.1 weighted points to Sapia.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +20.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +20 beside that +20.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sapia.ai minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Sapia.ai | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 42 | +28 | +5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 28 | +24 | +4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 44 | +18 | +2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 27 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 36 (F) | +20 | +20.0 |
§ 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 | Sapia.ai | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 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 Sapia.ai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sapia.ai 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