§ The result
Fountain leads Workstream by 5 points.
Inside the Screening cohort, rubric v1.0 puts Fountain on 44 and Workstream on 39, 5 points apart. Workstream takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 5 for Fountain, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The advantage Fountain holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Fountain 50, Workstream 40, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 33% of the weighted points Fountain gains across the 5 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
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
Fountain and Workstream are both filed under Screening AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: ATS-integrated and Scheduling.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Workstream is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Workstream 40
2.0 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Workstream 20
1.8 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Workstream 47
1.2 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Workstream 35
0.6 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Workstream 27
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Workstream 61
0.4 weighted points to Workstream
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Workstream 56
0.3 weighted points to Workstream
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.7 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 +5.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 47 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 61 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 56 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 39 (F) | +5 | +5.4 |
§ 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 | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 5 | 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 | 7 | 0 | 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 domainSources on a separate 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 | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
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 Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream 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