§ The result
Fountain leads Turing on all 7 criteria.
Fountain scores 44 and Turing 36 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Fountain is ahead of Turing on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Fountain 30 to Turing 28. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Fountain 58, Turing 45) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Fountain 55, Turing 44), the second being 21% of the weighted advantage Fountain holds across the 7 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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 21% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Turing 44
1.6 weighted points to Fountain
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Turing 42
1.6 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Turing 45
1.6 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Turing 27
1.6 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Turing 25
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Turing 28
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Turing 48
0.3 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.8 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 +7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 44 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 27 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 48 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 36 (F) | +8 | +7.8 |
§ 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 | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 8 | 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; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 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