§ The result
Fountain leads Ceipal by 9 points.
Fountain scores 44 and Ceipal 35 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. Fountain leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Ceipal leads 1, including Customer Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ceipal 30, Fountain 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Fountain holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
Vendor profile
Fountain
AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
§ The record
Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Fountain under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Fountain is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ceipal | Fountain |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Fountain 50
4.0 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Fountain 30
1.8 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Fountain 58
1.4 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Fountain 55
1.3 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Fountain 30
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Fountain 40
0.2 weighted points to Fountain
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Fountain 52
0.1 weighted points to Ceipal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -9.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Fountain.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Fountain | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 50 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 58 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 52 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 44 (F) | -9 | -9.5 |
§ 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 | Ceipal | Fountain | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 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