§ The result
CoderPad leads Pulsifi on 6 of the 7 criteria.
CoderPad scores 42 and Pulsifi 33 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Pulsifi is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: CoderPad takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, CoderPad 57 to Pulsifi 55. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (CoderPad 44, Pulsifi 28) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (CoderPad 45, Pulsifi 30), the second being 35% of the weighted advantage CoderPad holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
CoderPad
CoderPad is a technical hiring platform that auto-scores and ranks candidates on coding assessments (Screen), uses an AI reviewer to evaluate and rank applicants' asynchronous video pre-screen responses against employer criteria (Qualify), and hosts live collaborative coding interviews with AI assistance, note-taking and summaries (Interview).
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
CoderPad and Pulsifi are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CoderPad | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CoderPad 45 · Pulsifi 30
3.0 weighted points to CoderPad
15% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CoderPad 54 · Pulsifi 40
2.1 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CoderPad 44 · Pulsifi 28
1.9 weighted points to CoderPad
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CoderPad 58 · Pulsifi 46
1.0 weighted points to CoderPad
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CoderPad 28 · Pulsifi 25
0.4 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CoderPad 57 · Pulsifi 55
0.2 weighted points to CoderPad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +8.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.7 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 +8.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CoderPad minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | CoderPad | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 40 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 28 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 46 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 33 (F) | +9 | +8.7 |
§ 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 | CoderPad | 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% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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% | 32 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
CoderPad has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 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; some documentation or audit rows for CoderPad sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CoderPad last reviewed
- September 25, 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