Juicebox vs Maki, from the first search to the hire decision
Juicebox vs Maki depends on which stage of hiring you want AI to run. Pick Juicebox if you need to find and contact candidates who never applied, starting free and paying per seat. Pick Maki if you are an enterprise screening large applicant volumes and want audited voice screening, assessments and interview support on top of your ATS.
Before the application, and after it
Juicebox works before anyone applies. A recruiter describes a person in plain language, PeopleGPT searches 800M profiles, and Agents keep sourcing and drafting outreach for the role. It is bought by individual recruiters and teams, often the same day they try it.
Maki works from the moment someone applies to the hire decision. Its five stages run on top of your existing ATS: intake, screening by Shiro and Mochi, assessment by Ken, interviews scheduled by Kumi and captured by Tomo, then a ranked hire recommendation. It sells to enterprises and leans hard on audits, data residency and science.
Juicebox vs Maki, side by side
Each cell is what the vendor publishes about itself, read on 5 October 2026. Not stated means the pages read are silent.
| What you are comparing | Juicebox | Maki |
|---|---|---|
| Stage it covers | Sourcing and outreach | Intake, screening, assessment, interview and hire recommendation |
| Finding candidates | PeopleGPT, a plain language search over 800M global profiles | Not stated; works on applicants in your ATS |
| AI conversations | Outreach sequences; no AI interview described | Mochi voice screening by web or phone in 45+ languages, with follow up probing |
| Assessment | Not stated | Shiro skills screening across 300+ skills; Ken assessments across 400+ |
| Human interviews | Not stated | Kumi schedules from the ATS; Tomo joins Zoom, Teams or Meet to transcribe and structure |
| Compliance signals | SOC2 reports available by request to sales on higher plans | ISO 27001, EU data residency by default, bias audit by Holistic AI under NYC LL144 |
| Pricing model | Published per seat tiers, a free plan, Agents per agent | Quote only: platform plus usage based credits per agent |
Juicebox publishes figures; Maki does not. Neither appears here. Read on juicebox.ai and makipeople.com on 5 October 2026.
Choose Juicebox if, choose Maki if
Company size and where the volume sits do most of the deciding here.
A European employer gets 20,000 applications for its graduate scheme and must screen them fairly across 12 countries.
Maki. It names early talent as a use case, screens skills and voice at scale and publishes its bias audit.
Expect a scoped rollout and a quote rather than a same day start.
A scale up needs three machine learning engineers who are employed and not applying anywhere.
Juicebox. Plain language search across 800M profiles, contact reveals and sequences reach people who never applied.
Screening those people afterwards is up to you or another tool.
A retail group hiring hundreds of store staff each month loses applicants who wait days for a phone screen.
Maki. Mochi calls or meets candidates on the web whenever they are ready, then syncs results to the ATS.
Mochi's web mode is its default; phone is offered beside it.
A 3 person recruiting team wants AI help this week without procurement or a security review.
Juicebox. It has a free plan and self serve per seat tiers.
ATS and CRM sync sits on the Business tier.
What a Maki rollout involves, from its own pages
Maki describes an enterprise engagement rather than a signup. These items come from its homepage and pricing page.
- A live pipeline built from your job description in about 30 minutes, per Maki
- Competencies set at intake that drive every later stage
- A connection to one of 30+ supported ATS and HR systems
- Dedicated production and sandbox environments
- A named customer success manager and integration workshops
- A data processing agreement and role based admin controls
- Agents switched on individually, each on its own credits
Each product on a normal working day
How a recruiter's day changes with each tool, following the workflow each vendor publishes.
- Juicebox: build the pool Describe the hire, review a batch and calibrate the Agent by chatting with it. Each new batch moves closer to what you want.
- Juicebox: reach out Reveal emails and phone numbers with contact credits and send a sequence with automatic follow ups. Replies stop the sequence.
- Maki: screening runs itself Applicants arrive in your ATS and get a Mochi invitation. They talk to it by web or phone in their language, and it scores them against a fixed grid.
- Maki: interview with a co-pilot Kumi books the interview. Tomo joins the call, keeps the plan in front of the interviewer and writes structured notes tied to each competency.
- Maki: one decision card Every signal lands on a card with a scorecard, risk flags and a hire recommendation with a confidence level. Nobody is rejected automatically.
Juicebox vs Maki pricing, by model
Juicebox publishes its plans. A free plan comes first, then paid tiers billed per seat per month with monthly contact and export credits. Business adds unlimited contacts, ATS and CRM sync and hiring manager seats, and Agents are billed per agent.
Maki publishes no figures. Its pricing page describes an enterprise platform plus flexible, usage based pricing for its AI agents: you pay for candidate interactions rather than licences, and each agent runs on credits. Every path on that page ends at a request for a personalised quote.
Before you decide
Do
- Ask Maki for its NYC LL144 audit results and read them yourself
- Ask Maki which of its agents you need for your volume
- Run your hardest role through Juicebox's free plan before buying seats
- Map which stage of your funnel loses the most time today
Do not
- Expecting Maki to find passive candidates who never applied
- Expecting Juicebox to screen, assess or schedule after the search
- Comparing a seat price with a usage quote without modelling a year
If you need the search and a live interview
A fixed rubric per role, with questions that adapt live to what the candidate says.
For a team that wants sourcing like Juicebox and a screening interview without an enterprise rollout, The Cognitive covers both. It searches ~900M public profiles with verified emails and phones and runs a 10 or 20 minute live AI video interview, with a 1 to 5 score per criterion, overall written feedback, a transcript and a recording.
Keep reading
Juicebox review · Juicebox alternatives · Maki review · Maki alternatives · Apriora vs Maki · Juicebox vs Elly
How this was checked
Juicebox facts come from juicebox.ai and its pricing, PeopleGPT, Agents and Outreach pages. Maki facts come from makipeople.com, its Mochi, pricing and integrations pages. All were read on 5 October 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Is Juicebox better than Maki?
They are built for different stages, so neither wins outright. Juicebox is better for finding and contacting people who have not applied, with a free plan and per seat pricing. Maki is better for enterprises that need to screen, assess and interview large applicant volumes with audited, explainable scoring on top of an existing ATS.
Juicebox vs Maki pricing: how does each charge?
Juicebox publishes per seat monthly tiers, a free plan, contact and export credits, and Agents billed per agent. Maki publishes no figures: its pricing page describes an enterprise platform with usage based credits for each AI agent, charged on candidate interactions rather than licences, and asks you to request a personalised quote.
Does Maki source candidates?
None of the Maki pages read on 5 October 2026 describes a profile database or outreach to people who have not applied. Its stages start at intake and run through screening, assessment, interviews and a hire recommendation for applicants in your ATS. Juicebox is the sourcing tool in this pair.
What is Maki's Mochi?
Mochi is Maki's conversational voice screening agent. Candidates join a web call, the default, or a phone call and speak with an AI that asks questions, probes and evaluates eligibility, motivation, availability and communication. Maki says it scores against a fixed behaviourally anchored grid and syncs results to the ATS without rejecting anyone automatically.
Can I use Juicebox with Maki?
Yes, in sequence. Juicebox can find and contact passive candidates and push them into your ATS on its Business tier; Maki can then screen and assess them from the ATS. Confirm that your ATS appears on Juicebox's 41 named integrations and among Maki's 30+ supported systems.
Is Maki's AI bias audited?
Maki says Mochi is independently bias audited by Holistic AI under New York City Local Law 144, across gender and race or ethnicity, and links to the signed results. It also lists ISO 27001 certification, GDPR compliance and EU data residency by default. Juicebox offers SOC2 reporting on request for Team and Enterprise plans.
Explore: Juicebox review · Juicebox alternatives · Maki review · Maki alternatives