§ The result
Codility leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Codility opens a 21-point lead on Pulsifi, 54 to 33, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Codility leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Pulsifi leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Codility 60, Pulsifi 30, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage Codility holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Codility
Codility is a technical/coding assessment platform that screens and interviews software engineers with work-sample coding tests, live technical interviews, and integrity tooling including plagiarism and AI-use detection.
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
Codility 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 | Codility | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SG |
| Founded | 2009 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Pulsifi 30
6.0 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Pulsifi 20
4.5 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Pulsifi 28
2.6 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Pulsifi 25
2.5 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Pulsifi 40
2.5 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Pulsifi 46
1.6 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Pulsifi 55
0.8 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +20.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +21 beside that +20.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 30 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 20 | +25 | +4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 40 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 28 | +22 | +2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 46 | +20 | +1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 33 (F) | +21 | +20.7 |
§ 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 | Codility | 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Codility has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 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