§ The result
TalentLens leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
TalentLens sits 13 points above Pulsifi under rubric v1.0, 46 against 33, with both filed under Assessment. TalentLens leads every one of the 7 criteria, Pulsifi none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Pulsifi 55 to TalentLens 57. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Pulsifi 20, TalentLens 45, 18% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage TalentLens builds across the 7 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
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
§ The record
Pulsifi and TalentLens are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pulsifi | TalentLens |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pulsifi 20 · TalentLens 45
4.5 weighted points to TalentLens
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pulsifi 30 · TalentLens 52
4.4 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pulsifi 40 · TalentLens 50
1.5 weighted points to TalentLens
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pulsifi 46 · TalentLens 58
1.0 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pulsifi 25 · TalentLens 30
0.8 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pulsifi 28 · TalentLens 32
0.5 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pulsifi 55 · TalentLens 57
0.2 weighted points to TalentLens
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -12.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pulsifi minus TalentLens.
| Category | Weight | Pulsifi | TalentLens | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 52 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 45 | -25 | -4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 32 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 46 | 58 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 46 (F) | -13 | -12.8 |
§ 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 | Pulsifi | TalentLens | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pulsifi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TalentLens 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