§ The result
Arctic Shores leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 scores the Assessment entries Arctic Shores and Pulsifi at 46 and 33, a gap of 13 points. Of the 7 criteria Pulsifi wins none, and the narrowest lead Arctic Shores holds is on Human Oversight Design, Arctic Shores 56 to Pulsifi 55. The advantage Arctic Shores holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arctic Shores 50, Pulsifi 30, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 32% of the weighted points Arctic Shores gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Arctic Shores
Arctic Shores sells a task-based psychometric assessment platform ("Una") that scores candidates on behaviour captured during short interactive tasks - covering personality, workplace intelligence and learning agility - rather than self-report questionnaires or CV review.
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
Arctic Shores 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 | Arctic Shores | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SG |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Pulsifi 30
4.0 weighted points to Arctic Shores
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Pulsifi 20
2.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Pulsifi 40
2.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Pulsifi 25
1.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Pulsifi 46
1.4 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Pulsifi 28
0.2 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Pulsifi 55
0.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +12.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 30 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 40 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 46 | +18 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 33 (F) | +13 | +12.5 |
§ 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 | Arctic Shores | Pulsifi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 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 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 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