§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads CodeSignal by 13 points.
Pymetrics (Harver Games) sits 13 points above CodeSignal under rubric v1.0, 56 against 43, with both filed under Assessment. CodeSignal and Pymetrics (Harver Games) each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds (headed by Article 11 Technical Documentation) adds up to more weighted points. Pymetrics (Harver Games) takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (CodeSignal 38, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70), which is 45% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, CodeSignal 45 to Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80.
Vendor profile
CodeSignal
CodeSignal is a technical skills assessment and interview platform for developer hiring that adds AI features including an AI Interviewer, AI-assisted/agentic coding assessments, and AI-plus-human proctoring.
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
CodeSignal 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, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
6.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
6.3 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
1.5 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
0.6 weighted points to CodeSignal
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.6 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35
0.4 weighted points to CodeSignal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -12.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -12.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 70 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 80 | -35 | -6.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 56 (F) | -13 | -12.7 |
§ 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 | CodeSignal | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
CodeSignal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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 Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 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