§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads Emi on 5 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Pymetrics (Harver Games) (Assessment) opens a 23-point lead on Emi (Screening), 56 to 33. Emi is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Pymetrics (Harver Games) takes 5, the remaining 2 are level, and the nearest of those 5 is Human Oversight Design, Emi 44 to Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Emi 18, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 48% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 5 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
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
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 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 Pymetrics (Harver Games) is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Emi | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
11.2 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
8.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
2.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
0.7 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -23.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.2 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 -23.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | Emi | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 70 | -42 | -8.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 80 | -62 | -11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 60 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 50 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 56 (F) | -23 | -23.2 |
§ 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 | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate 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 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 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 Emi and Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi 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