Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Intervue.io vs Pulsifi
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
Substantial gaps
Video interview
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
2 points separate Pulsifi and Intervue.io.
Pulsifi holds a 2-point edge over Intervue.io under rubric v1.0, 33 to 31, across the Assessment and Video interview cohorts. Pulsifi leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Intervue.io leads 2, including Customer Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Intervue.io 12, Pulsifi 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage Pulsifi holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Intervue.io2
- Pulsifi5
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency12 vs 20
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Intervue.io is filed under Video interview AI, Pulsifi under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Intervue.io | Pulsifi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | SG |
| Founded | 2020 | 2017 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight44% of the movement so far
Intervue.io12Pulsifi201.4 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight58% of the movement so far
Intervue.io22Pulsifi250.4 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight70% of the movement so far
Intervue.io28Pulsifi300.4 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 4
Customer Documentation
8% weight80% of the movement so far
Intervue.io50Pulsifi460.3 weighted points to Intervue.io
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight89% of the movement so far
Intervue.io38Pulsifi400.3 weighted points to Pulsifi
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight96% of the movement so far
Intervue.io30Pulsifi280.2 weighted points to Intervue.io
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
Intervue.io54Pulsifi550.1 weighted points to Pulsifi
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.3 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 Intervue.io minus Pulsifi, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Intervue.io | Pulsifi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 20 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 46 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 31F | 33F | -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 | Intervue.io | Pulsifi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 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% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Intervue.io last reviewed
- September 25, 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.