§ The result
4 points separate ZipRecruiter and Turing.
ZipRecruiter (Sourcing) edges Turing (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 40 to 36. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of ZipRecruiter: ZipRecruiter is ahead on Post-Market Monitoring and Turing on Bias Audit Transparency. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Turing 27, ZipRecruiter 40, 12% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage ZipRecruiter holds across the 5 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
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
Turing is filed under Assessment AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing 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 | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Turing 27 · ZipRecruiter 40
1.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Turing 44 · ZipRecruiter 52
1.2 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Turing 45 · ZipRecruiter 55
1.2 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
18% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Turing 28 · ZipRecruiter 24
0.7 weighted points to Turing
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Turing 48 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.5 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
20% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Turing 42 · ZipRecruiter 40
0.4 weighted points to Turing
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Turing 25 · ZipRecruiter 27
0.3 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Turing minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Turing | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 24 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 52 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 27 | 40 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 54 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 36 (F) | 40 (F) | -4 | -3.6 |
§ 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 | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ZipRecruiter 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: 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter last reviewed
- September 25, 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