HomeCompareCezanne Recruitment vs Harver

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cezanne Recruitment vs Harver

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Harver leads Cezanne Recruitment by 15 points.

Harver finishes 15 points clear of Cezanne Recruitment under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 41 — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Harver: Harver is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Cezanne Recruitment on Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cezanne Recruitment 24, Harver 80) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 61% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 5 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Cezanne Recruitment 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.

RecordCezanne RecruitmentHarver
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersGBNL
Founded20122015

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 56% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Cezanne Recruitment 24 · Harver 80

    10.1 weighted points to Harver

  2. 20% weight · 84% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cezanne Recruitment 40 · Harver 65

    5.0 weighted points to Harver

  3. 15% weight · 90% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cezanne Recruitment 28 · Harver 35

    1.1 weighted points to Harver

  4. 12% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Cezanne Recruitment 58 · Harver 50

    1.0 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  5. 12% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Cezanne Recruitment 44 · Harver 40

    0.5 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  6. 8% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cezanne Recruitment 57 · Harver 60

    0.2 weighted points to Harver

  7. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cezanne Recruitment 54 · Harver 55

    0.1 weighted points to Harver

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -15.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -15.1.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cezanne Recruitment minus Harver.

CategoryWeightCezanne RecruitmentHarverΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4065-25-5.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2480-56-10.1
FRIA Support15%2835-7-1.1
Data Governance Disclosure15%5455-1-0.1
Human Oversight Design12%5850+8+1.0
Post-Market Monitoring12%4440+4+0.5
Customer Documentation8%5760-3-0.2
Total100%41 (F)56 (F)-15-15.1

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCezanne RecruitmentHarver
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%41Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain10—
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%256Sources on the vendor's own domain100Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Cezanne Recruitment has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 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 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Cezanne Recruitment, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Cezanne Recruitment 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.