§ The result
UKG leads Pulsifi by 11 points.
UKG sits 11 points above Pulsifi under rubric v1.0 — 44 against 33 — with UKG filed under ATS-integrated and Pulsifi under Assessment. Pulsifi takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for UKG, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The advantage UKG holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Pulsifi 30, UKG 48, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 32% of the weighted points UKG gains 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
UKG
UKG is an enterprise HCM and workforce-management suite whose UKG Pro Recruiting applicant-tracking module, augmented by the embedded Bryte AI layer, drafts job descriptions and produces profile-match candidate scores to rank and shortlist applicants.
§ The record
Pulsifi is filed under Assessment AI, UKG under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Pulsifi is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pulsifi | UKG |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pulsifi 30 · UKG 48
3.6 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pulsifi 40 · UKG 56
2.4 weighted points to UKG
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pulsifi 20 · UKG 30
1.8 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pulsifi 25 · UKG 35
1.5 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pulsifi 28 · UKG 38
1.2 weighted points to UKG
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pulsifi 46 · UKG 55
0.7 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pulsifi 55 · UKG 52
0.4 weighted points to Pulsifi
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pulsifi minus UKG.
| Category | Weight | Pulsifi | UKG | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 56 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 44 (F) | -11 | -10.9 |
§ 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 | UKG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 0 | 2 | — |
| 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% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 2 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pulsifi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- UKG last reviewed
- June 7, 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