§ The result
Harver leads Fetcher by 19 points.
Harver finishes 19 points clear of Fetcher under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 37 — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Harver leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Fetcher leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Fetcher 28, Harver 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 48% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Fetcher
AI-powered candidate sourcing and outbound recruiting platform that automates passive and active talent sourcing, personalized email outreach, and inbound applicant screening for corporate recruiting teams.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
§ The record
Fetcher is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Harver under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Harver is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fetcher | Harver |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2014 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fetcher 28 · Harver 80
9.4 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fetcher 27 · Harver 65
7.6 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fetcher 25 · Harver 35
1.5 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fetcher 35 · Harver 40
0.6 weighted points to Harver
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fetcher 55 · Harver 60
0.4 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fetcher 52 · Harver 50
0.2 weighted points to Fetcher
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -19.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -19.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fetcher minus Harver.
| Category | Weight | Fetcher | Harver | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 27 | 65 | -38 | -7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 80 | -52 | -9.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 56 (F) | -19 | -19.2 |
§ 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 | Fetcher | Harver | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 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 the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Fetcher has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 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 29 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Fetcher, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fetcher last reviewed
- July 17, 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