§ The result
Cangrade leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 scores the Assessment entries Cangrade and Pulsifi at 45 and 33, a gap of 12 points. Of the 7 criteria Pulsifi wins none, and the narrowest lead Cangrade holds is on Human Oversight Design, Cangrade 56 to Pulsifi 55. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cangrade 52, Pulsifi 30, 20% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage Cangrade builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cangrade
Cangrade is a predictive pre-hire assessment and screening platform that scores candidates against customer-specific success models built from roughly 50 psychometric traits, with add-on modules for resume screening, structured and video interviews, interview scheduling, and reference checking.
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
Cangrade and Pulsifi are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cangrade | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2014 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Pulsifi 30
4.4 weighted points to Cangrade
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Pulsifi 20
2.7 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Pulsifi 40
2.1 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Pulsifi 46
1.3 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Pulsifi 25
0.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Pulsifi 28
0.5 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Pulsifi 55
0.1 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 30 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 40 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 46 | +16 | +1.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 33 (F) | +12 | +11.8 |
§ 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 | Cangrade | Pulsifi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 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 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 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 Cangrade sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade 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