§ The result
3 points separate Recruiterflow and Pulsifi.
Recruiterflow (ATS-integrated) edges Pulsifi (Assessment) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 36 to 33. Pulsifi takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Recruiterflow, whose share includes Customer Documentation. Even Customer Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Pulsifi 46, Recruiterflow 56, 8% weight), is only 22% of the weighted advantage Recruiterflow builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Recruiterflow
Recruiterflow is an ATS and CRM for recruiting agencies and executive search firms. Its AIRA AI layer ranks candidates already in a firm's database against each job with an explainable 0–100 Criteria Score (AIRA Matchmaker, shown as the 'AI Matches' card), and adds natural-language candidate search, external profile sourcing and an AI call notetaker that fills in interview scorecards.
§ The record
Pulsifi is filed under Assessment AI, Recruiterflow under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Pulsifi is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pulsifi | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
8% weight · 20% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pulsifi 46 · Recruiterflow 56
0.8 weighted points to Recruiterflow
15% weight · 38% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pulsifi 25 · Recruiterflow 30
0.8 weighted points to Recruiterflow
20% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pulsifi 30 · Recruiterflow 33
0.6 weighted points to Recruiterflow
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pulsifi 40 · Recruiterflow 44
0.6 weighted points to Recruiterflow
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pulsifi 28 · Recruiterflow 33
0.6 weighted points to Recruiterflow
18% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pulsifi 20 · Recruiterflow 18
0.4 weighted points to Pulsifi
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pulsifi 55 · Recruiterflow 58
0.4 weighted points to Recruiterflow
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -3.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pulsifi minus Recruiterflow.
| Category | Weight | Pulsifi | Recruiterflow | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 18 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 44 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 33 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 46 | 56 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 36 (F) | -3 | -3.4 |
§ 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 | Pulsifi | Recruiterflow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 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% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Recruiterflow has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for Recruiterflow, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pulsifi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruiterflow 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