§ The result
Xobin leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
The Assessment cohort pairing of Xobin and Pulsifi comes out 50 to 33 under rubric v1.0, a 17-point lead for Xobin. Xobin takes all 7 criteria and Pulsifi none of them; the nearest contest is Human Oversight Design, Pulsifi 55 to Xobin 58. The advantage Xobin holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Pulsifi 30, Xobin 62, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 37% of the weighted points Xobin gains 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
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
§ The record
Pulsifi and Xobin are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pulsifi | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | SG | IN |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pulsifi 30 · Xobin 62
6.4 weighted points to Xobin
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pulsifi 20 · Xobin 43
4.1 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pulsifi 40 · Xobin 57
2.5 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pulsifi 25 · Xobin 35
1.5 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pulsifi 28 · Xobin 38
1.2 weighted points to Xobin
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pulsifi 46 · Xobin 60
1.1 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pulsifi 55 · Xobin 58
0.4 weighted points to Xobin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -17 beside that -17.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pulsifi minus Xobin.
| Category | Weight | Pulsifi | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 62 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 43 | -23 | -4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 57 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 46 | 60 | -14 | -1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 50 (F) | -17 | -17.3 |
§ 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 | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | Sources 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; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pulsifi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin 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