§ The result
Ashby leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
Ashby finishes 23 points clear of Pulsifi under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 33 — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria, Pulsifi none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Ashby 62 to Pulsifi 55. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ashby 62, Pulsifi 20, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 32% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
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
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Pulsifi under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Pulsifi is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2018 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Pulsifi 20
7.6 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Pulsifi 30
6.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Pulsifi 40
2.7 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Pulsifi 25
2.5 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Pulsifi 28
1.7 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Pulsifi 46
1.4 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Pulsifi 55
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +23.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +23 beside that +23.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 30 | +33 | +6.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 20 | +42 | +7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 28 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 46 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 33 (F) | +23 | +23.3 |
§ 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 | Ashby | 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% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 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