Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Cognisess vs Pulsifi
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
3 points separate Pulsifi and Cognisess.
Pulsifi holds a 3-point edge over Cognisess under rubric v1.0, 33 to 30, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of Pulsifi, with 1 level: Pulsifi is ahead on Human Oversight Design and Cognisess on Post-Market Monitoring. Human Oversight Design is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cognisess 42, Pulsifi 55 — and at a 12% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage Pulsifi holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Cognisess2
- Pulsifi4
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Human Oversight Design42 vs 55
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Human Oversight Design12% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Cognisess and Pulsifi are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Cognisess | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SG |
| Founded | 2011 | 2017 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Human Oversight Design
12% weight34% of the movement so far
Cognisess42Pulsifi551.6 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight56% of the movement so far
Cognisess25Pulsifi301.0 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight72% of the movement so far
Cognisess20Pulsifi250.8 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight83% of the movement so far
Cognisess32Pulsifi280.5 weighted points to Cognisess
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight93% of the movement so far
Cognisess40Pulsifi460.5 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Cognisess42Pulsifi400.3 weighted points to Cognisess
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -3.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Pulsifi, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 46 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 30F | 33F | -3 | -3.0 |
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 | Cognisess | 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 | — | 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% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 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 Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess 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
Scored against