§ The result
UKG leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
UKG scores 44 and Turing 36 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. UKG is ahead of Turing on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Turing 28 to UKG 30. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Turing 44, UKG 56, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 24% of the weighted advantage UKG holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
UKG
UKG is an enterprise HCM and workforce-management suite whose UKG Pro Recruiting applicant-tracking module, augmented by the embedded Bryte AI layer, drafts job descriptions and produces profile-match candidate scores to rank and shortlist applicants.
§ The record
Turing is filed under Assessment AI, UKG under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Turing | UKG |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 24% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Turing 44 · UKG 56
1.8 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Turing 25 · UKG 35
1.5 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Turing 27 · UKG 38
1.3 weighted points to UKG
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Turing 42 · UKG 48
1.2 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Turing 45 · UKG 52
0.8 weighted points to UKG
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Turing 48 · UKG 55
0.6 weighted points to UKG
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Turing 28 · UKG 30
0.4 weighted points to UKG
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Turing minus UKG.
| Category | Weight | Turing | UKG | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 48 | -6 | -1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 56 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 27 | 38 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 36 (F) | 44 (F) | -8 | -7.6 |
§ 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 | Turing | UKG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 2 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 28 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- UKG last reviewed
- June 7, 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