§ The result
4 points separate AmazingHiring and Pulsifi.
AmazingHiring holds a 4-point edge over Pulsifi under rubric v1.0, 37 to 33, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Pulsifi takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for AmazingHiring, whose share includes Data Governance Disclosure. The advantage AmazingHiring holds is spread out: Data Governance Disclosure is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (AmazingHiring 50, Pulsifi 40, 15% weight), yet it supplies only 32% of the weighted points AmazingHiring gains across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
AmazingHiring
A technical-talent sourcing platform that aggregates public developer profiles from 50+ networks (GitHub, Stack Overflow, Kaggle, LinkedIn) and uses AI to rank and surface candidates for recruiters, with verified-contact retrieval and outreach automation.
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
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Pulsifi under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Pulsifi is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2011 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Pulsifi 40
1.5 weighted points to AmazingHiring
20% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Pulsifi 30
1.0 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Pulsifi 55
0.8 weighted points to Pulsifi
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Pulsifi 25
0.8 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Pulsifi 28
0.6 weighted points to AmazingHiring
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Pulsifi 46
0.5 weighted points to AmazingHiring
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Pulsifi 20
0.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.9 — 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 +4 beside that +3.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 28 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 46 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 33 (F) | +4 | +3.9 |
§ 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 | AmazingHiring | Pulsifi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 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