The result

Pymetrics (Harver Games) takes the total, Glider AI takes more of the criteria.

Under rubric v1.0, Pymetrics (Harver Games) and Glider AI finish 4 points apart, 56 to 52, as two Assessment entries. Glider AI leads more of the criteria, 4 against 3 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), yet Pymetrics (Harver Games) takes Article 11 Technical Documentation, which carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Glider AI 52, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70 — and at a 20% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.

Criteria won

7 criteria

  • Glider AI4
  • Pymetrics (Harver Games)3
Widest raw gap
Article 11 Technical Documentation52 vs 70
Heaviest weighted swing
Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight

Keep this comparison

Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.

Sent once, with links to turn on alerts for either vendor. No list.

The record

Categories, scope and company facts.

Glider AI and Pymetrics (Harver Games) are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.

RecordGlider AIPymetrics (Harver Games)
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20202013

What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    20% weight37% of the movement so far

    Glider AI52
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)70

    3.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)

  2. Bias Audit Transparency

    18% weight59% of the movement so far

    Glider AI68
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)80

    2.2 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)

  3. FRIA Support

    15% weight74% of the movement so far

    Glider AI35
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)25

    1.5 weighted points to Glider AI

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    15% weight84% of the movement so far

    Glider AI54
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)60

    0.9 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)

  5. Human Oversight Design

    12% weight90% of the movement so far

    Glider AI55
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)50

    0.6 weighted points to Glider AI

  6. Post-Market Monitoring

    12% weight96% of the movement so far

    Glider AI40
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)35

    0.6 weighted points to Glider AI

  7. Customer Documentation

    8% weight100% of the movement so far

    Glider AI60
    Pymetrics (Harver Games)55

    0.4 weighted points to Glider AI

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.6.

Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Glider AI minus Pymetrics (Harver Games), coloured for whichever of the two it favours.

CategoryWeightGlider AIPymetrics (Harver Games)Δ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5270-18-3.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%6880-12-2.2
FRIA Support15%3525+10+1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%5460-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5550+5+0.6
Post-Market Monitoring12%4035+5+0.6
Customer Documentation8%6055+5+0.4
Total100%52F56F-4-3.6

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.

CriterionWeightGlider AIPymetrics (Harver Games)
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain20Sources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on a separate domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain01—
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain10Sources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain11—
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain20Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%276Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain92Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 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 Glider AI and Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Glider AI 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