§ The result
Harver leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Harver (Assessment) opens a 23-point lead on Emi (Screening), 56 to 33. Of the 7 criteria Emi wins none, and the narrowest lead Harver holds is on Post-Market Monitoring, Emi 35 to Harver 40. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Emi 18, Harver 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Emi
Emi runs AI agents on WhatsApp, SMS and Messenger that screen and score frontline job applicants against employer-set criteria, schedule interviews, and collect hiring documents and check them against Mexican government databases.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening 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 | Emi | Harver |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AR | NL |
| Founded | 2017 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Harver 80
11.2 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Harver 65
7.4 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Harver 55
1.6 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Harver 35
1.5 weighted points to Harver
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Harver 60
1.0 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Harver 50
0.7 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Harver 40
0.6 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -24.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -24.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Harver.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Harver | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 65 | -37 | -7.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 80 | -62 | -11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 50 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 56 (F) | -23 | -24.0 |
§ 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 | Emi | Harver | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 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 Emi sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi 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