Small business▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 7 → 19 of 80
4 categories · RankedJuicebox
87Judge labels
4First choices
5Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in Talent intelligence for small business buyers
Rank 8 of 90 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 10 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Juicebox →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business19 of 90
0%14 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market8 of 90
2%10 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise54 of 76
0%1 label
under the label threshold
In ai recruiting assistants · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Juicebox for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI recruiting assistants | Talent acquisition | 2% | 8 of 90 | 0% | 10 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Talent intelligence | Performance and talent management | 2% | 14 of 90 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Pin at 27% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Recruiting CRM and sourcing | Talent acquisition | 0% | 22 of 111 | 0% | 13 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| HR AI assistants | Onboarding and employee experience | 0% | 109 of 142 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by MeBeBot at 21% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Juicebox held within the floor in all four categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · AI recruiting assistants · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 20 → 6 of 84
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 52 of 74, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI recruiting assistants | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 20 → 8 of 90 |
| Talent intelligence | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 29 → 14 of 90 |
| Recruiting CRM | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 20 → 22 of 111 |
| HR AI assistants | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 56 → 109 of 142 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 13 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Juicebox across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Juicebox across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct11 labels1
Paraphrase2 labels1
Comparative34 labels5not counted in share
Budget-constrained21 labels2
Scale-constrained11 labelsNone
Negative8 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative87 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 9 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“I'd lean toward Juicebox or HireVue depending on your biggest pain point” MiniMax M2.5 · AI recruiting assistants · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For a budget-conscious company hiring externally, I'd start with Juicebox.” GPT-6 Luna · Talent intelligence · budget prompt · first choice
“For generalist roles: LinkedIn Recruiter or Juicebox.ai.” Mistral Small · Recruiting CRM · comparative prompt · first choice
“It is highly appreciated by scaling startups and agencies because of its speed and high email sequence reply rates.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · AI recruiting assistants · comparative prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Juicebox, over the 87 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Juicebox was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Juicebox, over the 87 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Juicebox was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Juicebox. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 87 of the 87 answers that named Juicebox and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
pin.com55
hiretruffle.com35
juicebox.aiYour site35
lever.co32
metaview.ai29
selectsoftwarereviews.com29
leonar.app26
peoplemanagingpeople.com24
g2.com23
skima.ai23
276 of the 311 domain citations in answers naming Juicebox came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
juicebox.ai is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Juicebox takes 2% of first choices and Manatal takes 31%.ShowHide
Search and answers
juicebox.ai is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Juicebox takes 2% of first choices and Manatal takes 31%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “ai recruiter”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best ai recruiter”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 49,500 a month (“juicebox”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 976 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 40,220 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 2,701 · 132 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,423
- Paid Google search
- 3 searches its ads show for, about 219 clicks and $2,850 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 8 of 90 in AI recruiting assistants
Segment leader
31%
Manatal
- First choices
- 4 across its categories
- Named in
- 87 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 87 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on juicebox.ai
787
subdomains included
Content
454
counted in the table below
Documentation
181
Product · Integration
0 · 7
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 376 | 28 | 2026-09-22 | ||
| Comparison | 35 | 7 | 2026-09-29 | ||
| Case study | 24 | 24 | 2026-09-29 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 16 | 3 | 2026-08-13 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 1 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 1 | 0 | 2025-12-22 | ||
| News or press | 1 | 0 | 2025-04-22 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-29Juicebox vs gem comparison
- 2026-09-29Juicebox vs metaview comparison
- 2026-09-29Juicebox vs hireez comparison
- 2026-09-29Juicebox vs seekout comparison
- 2026-09-29How Starbridge Scaled from 20 to 60 Employees with Talent Engineering case study
- 2026-09-29How Merge Filled 10+ Critical Roles with a Lean Recruiting Team case study
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page juicebox.ai exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Juicebox
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Juicebox; a claim can dispute any of them.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 10Juicebox.ai 1Juicebox/PeopleGPT 1
Follow Juicebox
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Juicebox is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Juicebox is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The AI platform for recruiting
- For
- recruiters
- Price stated
- Free plan available juicebox.ai
- Starting price
- 0 juicebox.ai
- Free plan or trial
- Yes. To get started, use the “Start for Free” button to open the platform. Then, sign up or log in to access your account. juicebox.ai
- Integrations claimed
- 41 juicebox.ai · 62 juicebox.ai/pricing · 50 juicebox.ai/integrations pages disagree
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type II CertifiedSOC 2 Type IIGDPRZero Data Retention Certificate
- Hosting
- United States
- Customers named
- Platinum DentalHeidi HealthezCaterSupioFortune 500boutique recruiting agenciesCursorNotion
What Juicebox's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: juicebox.ai, juicebox.ai/pricing, trust.juicebox.ai, juicebox.ai/customers, juicebox.ai/integrations. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Juicebox's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Juicebox, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Juicebox by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Juicebox is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Juicebox, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.