§ The result
Harver leads Cappfinity by 16 points.
The Assessment cohort pairing of Harver and Cappfinity comes out 56 to 40 under rubric v1.0, a 16-point lead for Harver. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Harver: Harver is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Cappfinity on Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cappfinity 28, Harver 80) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 54% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cappfinity
Cappfinity sells strengths-, skills- and cognitive-reasoning assessments, task-based job simulations, a digital assessment centre and an asynchronous video interview platform with optional AI-assisted scoring, and is used mainly for graduate and early-careers hiring.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
§ The record
Cappfinity and Harver are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| Record | Cappfinity | Harver |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | NL |
| Founded | 2005 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cappfinity 28 · Harver 80
9.4 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cappfinity 36 · Harver 65
5.8 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cappfinity 28 · Harver 35
1.1 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cappfinity 52 · Harver 55
0.4 weighted points to Harver
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cappfinity 56 · Harver 60
0.3 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cappfinity 52 · Harver 50
0.2 weighted points to Cappfinity
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cappfinity 38 · Harver 40
0.2 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -16 beside that -17.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cappfinity minus Harver.
| Category | Weight | Cappfinity | Harver | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 36 | 65 | -29 | -5.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 80 | -52 | -9.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 56 (F) | -16 | -17.0 |
§ 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 | Cappfinity | Harver | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 29 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Cappfinity has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 29 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cappfinity sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Cappfinity, across 6 distinct source domains, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cappfinity last reviewed
- September 25, 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