§ The result
Fountain leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
Fountain, filed under Screening, comes out 11 points above Pulsifi, filed under Assessment: 44 against 33 under rubric v1.0. Fountain takes all 7 criteria and Pulsifi none of them; the nearest contest is Human Oversight Design, Fountain 58 to Pulsifi 55. The advantage Fountain holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Fountain 50, Pulsifi 30, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 36% of the weighted points Fountain gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
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.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Pulsifi under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: ATS-integrated.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Pulsifi is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2014 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Pulsifi 30
4.0 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Pulsifi 40
2.3 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Pulsifi 20
1.8 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Pulsifi 28
1.4 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Pulsifi 25
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Pulsifi 46
0.5 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Pulsifi 55
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +11.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 30 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 46 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 33 (F) | +11 | +11.1 |
§ 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 | 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 2 | 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 | 26 | 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; Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
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 Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 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