§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads Clevry by 11 points.
Pymetrics (Harver Games) sits 11 points above Clevry under rubric v1.0, 56 against 45, with both filed under Assessment. Clevry takes 3 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 4 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Clevry 38, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 60% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Clevry
Clevry is a UK psychometric assessment platform offering norm-referenced personality questionnaires, cognitive ability tests and situational judgement tests, plus recorded one-way video interviews, an interview builder, a skills-first ATS and an AI tool that maps job ads onto its personality scale library.
Vendor profile
Pymetrics (Harver Games)
Behavioral assessment using browser-based "games" that infer cognitive and emotional traits. Acquired by Harver in 2022 and folded into the Harver Games product line.
§ The record
Clevry and Pymetrics (Harver Games) are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Clevry | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 1991 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Clevry 38 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
7.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Clevry 52 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
3.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Clevry 58 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
1.0 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Clevry 30 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25
0.8 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Clevry 55 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
0.8 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Clevry 30 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35
0.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Clevry 60 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.4 weighted points to Clevry
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.6 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 -10.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Clevry minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | Clevry | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 70 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 80 | -42 | -7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 56 (F) | -11 | -10.4 |
§ 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 | Clevry | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 39 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Clevry has 44 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 39 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Pymetrics (Harver Games) has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Clevry and Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 44 for Clevry, across 2 distinct source domains, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Clevry last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pymetrics (Harver Games) 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