§ The result
Harver leads ADP by 8 points.
Harver scores 56 and ADP 48 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Harver leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while ADP leads 3, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — ADP 46, Harver 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 63% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
ADP
ADP is an enterprise human capital management and payroll provider whose recruiting suite uses AI to parse, rank, and match job applicants via its Candidate Relevancy tool, ADP Assist generative-AI assistant/job-description generator, and skills intelligence.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
§ The record
ADP is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Harver under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Harver is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | ADP | Harver |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 1949 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ADP 46 · Harver 80
6.1 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
ADP 53 · Harver 65
2.4 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
ADP 28 · Harver 35
1.1 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ADP 55 · Harver 50
0.6 weighted points to ADP
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ADP 45 · Harver 40
0.6 weighted points to ADP
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
ADP 57 · Harver 55
0.3 weighted points to ADP
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
ADP 58 · Harver 60
0.2 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ADP minus Harver.
| Category | Weight | ADP | Harver | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 65 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 46 | 80 | -34 | -6.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 56 (F) | -8 | -8.2 |
§ 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 | ADP | Harver | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
ADP has 23 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 33 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for ADP, across 2 distinct source domains, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ADP last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Harver last reviewed
- May 21, 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