§ The result
Infor Talent Science leads Fountain by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Infor Talent Science, filed under Assessment, finishes on 49 and Fountain, filed under Screening, on 44, 5 points apart. Fountain takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Infor Talent Science, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Fountain 30, Infor Talent Science 42, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 36% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science holds across the 6 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
Infor Talent Science
Infor Talent Science is a cloud-based pre-hire behavioral and cognitive assessment platform. It scores candidates against patented machine-learning 'Performance Profiles' built from the behavior and performance data of an employer's successful incumbents, and gives hiring teams fit scores, recommendations and interview questions that are used to rank and route applicants.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Infor Talent Science 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 Infor Talent Science is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2002 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Infor Talent Science 42
2.2 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
20% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Infor Talent Science 58
1.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Infor Talent Science 50
1.0 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Infor Talent Science 35
0.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Infor Talent Science 60
0.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Infor Talent Science 45
0.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Infor Talent Science 57
0.3 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Infor Talent Science.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 49 (F) | -5 | -5.1 |
§ 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 | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | 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 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Infor Talent Science 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