§ The result
Harver leads Fountain by 12 points.
Harver sits 12 points above Fountain under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 44 — with Harver filed under Assessment and Fountain under Screening. Harver leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Fountain leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Fountain 30, Harver 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 67% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Fountain
AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
§ The record
Fountain 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 | Fountain | Harver |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2014 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Harver 80
9.0 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Harver 65
3.0 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Harver 50
1.0 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Harver 35
0.8 weighted points to Harver
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Harver 60
0.6 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -12.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Harver.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Harver | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 65 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 80 | -50 | -9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 56 (F) | -12 | -12.4 |
§ 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 | Fountain | 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% | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 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% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 30 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 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