Natural-language candidate search
Hands-onJuicebox
formerly PeopleGPT
Sourcing tool where you describe the person you want in a sentence instead of building a Boolean string, with contact credits and email outreach on the paid plans.
The short answer
- Best for
- Sourcers describing profiles that resist Boolean
- Not ideal for
- European recruitment that has to account for the origin of every personal data point
- Price
- Free, then from USD 99 per seat / month
- Closest alternative
- SeekOutA broader platform that also rediscovers your own ATS, at a similar entry point
At a glance
- Recruitment fitStrong
- Ease of useStrong
- ImplementationStrong
- Price transparencyFair
- Value for moneyFair
- ScalabilityFair
Why these assessments
- Recruitment fitStrong
- It exists to find candidates: you describe the person you want and it searches for that shape.
- Ease of useStrong
- We use it. A sentence replaces the Boolean string, and the free tier lets you test that claim before paying.
- ImplementationStrong
- A free tier and a seat one person can buy alone; ATS integration, though, only exists on the custom plan.
- Price transparencyFair
- The free tier and the seat price are published, but the agents are a separate subscription and the top plan is a quote.
- Value for moneyFair
- Search and outreach in one seat at USD 99, with ceilings on credits, exports and mailboxes that decide the real cost.
- ScalabilityFair
- Priced per seat with credit ceilings, and the ATS integration that a team would need is on the custom plan.
Our reading of the evidence on this page. No score, no formula.
Where it sits
- Discover
- Contact
- Outreach
- ATS
The SourcrLab bottom line
The search genuinely works, and the free tier is enough to prove that to yourself in an afternoon. The paid plans are priced per seat with a credit allowance, which makes them comparable to a contact-data subscription rather than to an ATS. The open question is compliance, and it is a real one.
Best fit
Searches where the requirement is a shape rather than a keyword: someone who has done this kind of work, at this kind of company, at this stage.
Think twice if
European recruitment where you need to account for the origin of every personal data point. The tool aggregates profiles, and that question lands on you, not on the vendor.
Hands-on experience
Pieter Henderyckx's take
Recruiter and founder of SourcrLab
PeopleGPT impressed me when I first tried it. The natural language search is genuinely cool: you describe who you're looking for in plain English and it finds matching profiles. The tech works. But here's my honest take: in Europe, the GDPR concerns are real. The platform aggregates personal data from various sources, and I'm not fully comfortable using it in real client workflows where compliance matters. I've tested it, played around with searches, and seen good results. But "good results" and "legally safe to use for European recruitment" are two different things. If you're US-based, fewer issues. If you're in the EU, do your own due diligence before going all-in. The concept is the future, but the compliance side needs to catch up.
Why choose Juicebox?
You describe, it searches
Plain-language search removes the step where a good brief becomes a bad Boolean string. From our own use: the results hold up, which is not something every AI search claim survives.
A free tier that lets you test the claim
One seat, limited searches and five contact credits, at no cost. Enough to see whether the search finds your kind of candidate before any budget conversation.
Search and outreach in the same place
From Starter, contact credits and email outreach with AI templates sit alongside the search, so a found candidate can be approached without exporting to a second tool.
Main trade-offs
Where the data comes from is your problem
The platform aggregates personal data from various sources. In the EU that raises lawful basis, information duty and retention, and none of it is settled by the vendor's marketing. This is the reason we do not use it in client work.
Credits, exports and mailboxes all have ceilings
Starter is 500 contact credits and 500 exports a month on one mailbox; Growth is 1,500 per seat on three. Unlimited search is not unlimited contact.
ATS integration is on the custom plan
ATS and CRM integrations, analytics and onboarding sit on Business, which is annual and quoted. Below that, what you find lives in Juicebox until you export it.
The agents are a separate subscription
Juicebox Agents is $199 a month per agent on top of the seat. Worth knowing before a demo built around them.
Pricing and buying reality
Free, then from USD 99 per seat / month
- Free: USD 0, 1 seat, limited searches, 5 one-off contact credits, no exports
- Starter: USD 99 per seat / month. Unlimited searches, 500 contact credits and 500 exports a month, 1 mailbox
- Growth: USD 179 per seat / month, up to 5 seats. 1,500 credits and exports per seat, 3 mailboxes per user
- Business: custom, annual only. Adds ATS and CRM integrations, analytics and onboarding
- Juicebox Agents: USD 199 per month per agent. Annual billing takes 15 percent off
What we do not know
- What Business costs
- Where the profile data is sourced from, in detail
- How opt-out and data subject requests are handled
Checked on the vendor's pricing page, August 2026. Juicebox pricing page
How it fits your stack
Works with
- Your ATS or CRM, on the Business plan
Likely replaces
- An afternoon of Boolean string building
May overlap with
- hireEZ and SeekOut on search; contact data providers on credits
Check before buying
- Whether the free tier finds your kind of candidate at all
- Your credit burn against 500 or 1,500 a month
- Your own lawful basis before European candidate data reaches your ATS
Juicebox vs alternatives
Products a buyer would genuinely put next to this one, with the reason you would pick each instead.
Choose SeekOut if you want a broader platform with rediscovery of your own ATS, at a similar entry price.
Consider hireEZ if you also want screening and scheduling in the same layer and are consolidating tools.
Consider LinkedIn Recruiter when candidates maintaining their own profiles matters more than search phrasing.
Juicebox head to head
Pairs SourcrLab has looked at as a single buying decision, with the trade-offs written out.
Used Juicebox?
Tell other recruiters what worked, what did not, and who it suits. Positive, mixed or critical — all useful.
Evidence
- Plan prices, credits and export limits — checked against a primary source: Juicebox pricing page
- Free tier contents — checked against a primary source: Juicebox pricing page
- Search quality in real use — first-hand use: Tested by Pieter, not used in client work
- Data sources behind the profiles — not enough evidence
- GDPR position for EU candidate data — not enough evidence
Last reviewed: August 2026. How SourcrLab verifies information
Work at Juicebox (PeopleGPT)?
Email us to verify this profile or suggest a factual update.