§ The result
Glider AI leads Fountain by 8 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Glider AI, filed under Assessment, finishes on 52 and Fountain, filed under Screening, on 44, 8 points apart. Fountain takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 4 for Glider AI, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Fountain 30, Glider AI 68 — and at an 18% weight it carries 79% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Glider AI under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Glider AI 68
6.8 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Glider AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Glider AI 60
0.6 weighted points to Glider AI
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Glider AI 52
0.4 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Glider AI 55
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Glider AI 54
0.1 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -8.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 68 | -38 | -6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 52 (F) | -8 | -8.1 |
§ 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 | Fountain | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Glider AI 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