§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) takes the total, Handshake takes more of the criteria.
Pymetrics (Harver Games) scores 56 and Handshake 50 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Handshake leads more of the criteria than Pymetrics (Harver Games) — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Pymetrics (Harver Games). One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Handshake 52, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 51% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Handshake
Handshake is an early-career recruiting network whose employer tools use AI to rank applicants against employer-set criteria, find and message matching students and graduates, and target job promotions.
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
Handshake 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 | Handshake | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Handshake 52 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
5.0 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
20% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Handshake 48 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
4.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Handshake 48 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35
1.6 weighted points to Handshake
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Handshake 58 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
1.0 weighted points to Handshake
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Handshake 30 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25
0.8 weighted points to Handshake
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Handshake 57 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
0.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Handshake 60 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.4 weighted points to Handshake
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Handshake minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | Handshake | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 70 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 80 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 35 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 50 (F) | 56 (F) | -6 | -6.2 |
§ 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 | Handshake | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Handshake has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 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 Handshake and Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Handshake, across 2 distinct source domains, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Handshake 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