§ The result
Alooba leads Pulsifi on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Alooba scores 38 and Pulsifi 33 under rubric v1.0 — a 5-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Pulsifi is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Alooba takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Bias Audit Transparency, Alooba 22 to Pulsifi 20. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (Alooba 58, Pulsifi 46) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Alooba 40, Pulsifi 30), the second being 36% of the weighted advantage Alooba holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Alooba
Alooba sells online skills assessments (auto-graded SQL, Python/R, multiple-choice and data-analysis tests, plus manually graded free-response and one-way video questions) that employers use to screen, benchmark and optionally auto-reject job candidates.
Vendor profile
Pulsifi
Pulsifi gives candidates and employees 0-100 Role Fit and Organizational Fit scores that combine personality, work-interest, work-culture and cognitive assessments with AI resume and skills analysis, and uses the scores to rank people for hiring, internal mobility and succession.
§ The record
Alooba and Pulsifi are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | SG |
| Founded | 2019 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Pulsifi 30
2.0 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Pulsifi 28
1.0 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Pulsifi 46
1.0 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Pulsifi 40
0.8 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Pulsifi 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Pulsifi 20
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 28 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 46 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 33 (F) | +5 | +5.5 |
§ 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 | Alooba | Pulsifi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pulsifi 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