§ The result
3 points separate Gloat and Fountain.
Gloat (Sourcing) edges Fountain (Screening) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 47 to 44. Gloat leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Fountain leads 2, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. Gloat takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Fountain 30, Gloat 38), which is 42% of the weighted advantage Gloat holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Customer Documentation, Fountain 52 to Gloat 62.
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
Gloat
Gloat is an AI-powered internal talent marketplace and "agentic HR" platform that matches an employer's existing employees to internal job openings, gigs, projects, mentorships, and learning based on inferred skills and career goals.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Gloat under Candidate sourcing 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 Gloat is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Gloat |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Gloat 38
1.4 weighted points to Gloat
8% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Gloat 62
0.8 weighted points to Gloat
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Gloat 62
0.5 weighted points to Gloat
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Gloat 58
0.4 weighted points to Gloat
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Gloat 48
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Gloat 28
0.3 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Gloat 42
0.2 weighted points to Gloat
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.1 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 -2.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Gloat.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Gloat | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 47 (F) | -3 | -2.7 |
§ 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 | Fountain | Gloat | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Gloat has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 29 for Gloat, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 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