§ The result
Korn Ferry takes the total, Fountain takes more of the criteria.
Korn Ferry (Assessment) edges Fountain (Screening) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 44. Fountain leads more of the criteria than Korn Ferry — 4 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Korn Ferry leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Korn Ferry. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Fountain 30, Korn Ferry 48 — and at an 18% weight it carries 67% of the weighted advantage Korn Ferry holds across the 2 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
Korn Ferry
Korn Ferry provides psychometric talent assessments (Korn Ferry Assess, the KF4D Four Dimensional assessment, KFALP leadership-potential assessment, and the Leadership Architect competency framework) used to evaluate candidates' personality, competencies, drivers, and cognitive ability for selection, promotion, and development decisions.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Korn Ferry 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 Korn Ferry is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Korn Ferry |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 1969 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Korn Ferry 48
3.2 weighted points to Korn Ferry
20% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Korn Ferry 58
1.6 weighted points to Korn Ferry
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Korn Ferry 33
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Korn Ferry 25
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Korn Ferry 52
0.7 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Korn Ferry 52
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Korn Ferry.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Korn Ferry | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 46 (F) | -2 | -2.1 |
§ 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 | Korn Ferry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 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; Korn Ferry has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Korn Ferry, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Korn Ferry last reviewed
- June 7, 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