§ The result
Harri leads Pulsifi by 8 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Harri, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 41 and Pulsifi, filed under Assessment, on 33, 8 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Harri: Harri is ahead on FRIA Support and Pulsifi on Human Oversight Design. The advantage Harri holds is spread out: FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Harri 44, Pulsifi 25, 15% weight), yet it supplies only 33% of the weighted points Harri gains across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Harri
Harri is a frontline workforce platform for hospitality, grocery and care employers whose pre-hire suite pairs a career portal and applicant tracking system with Carri, a conversational AI assistant that screens applicants and coordinates interviews, plus an agentic AI layer (Salli) for scheduling and labor-law compliance.
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
Harri is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Pulsifi under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
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 | Harri | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 32% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harri 44 · Pulsifi 25
2.9 weighted points to Harri
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harri 52 · Pulsifi 40
1.8 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harri 40 · Pulsifi 28
1.4 weighted points to Harri
8% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harri 60 · Pulsifi 46
1.1 weighted points to Harri
20% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harri 35 · Pulsifi 30
1.0 weighted points to Harri
18% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harri 22 · Pulsifi 20
0.4 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harri 52 · Pulsifi 55
0.4 weighted points to Pulsifi
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 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 +8.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harri minus Pulsifi.
| Category | Weight | Harri | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 44 | 25 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 46 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 33 (F) | +8 | +8.2 |
§ 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 | Harri | 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 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 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 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 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