§ The result
HiPeople leads Harri by 20 points.
HiPeople finishes 20 points clear of Harri under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 41 (F) — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. HiPeople leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Harri leads 1, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Harri 22, HiPeople 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 52% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Harri
Harri is a frontline workforce platform for hospitality, grocery and care employers whose pre-hire suite pairs a career portal and applicant tracking system with Carri, a conversational AI assistant that screens applicants and coordinates interviews, plus an agentic AI layer (Salli) for scheduling and labor-law compliance.
Vendor profile
HiPeople
HiPeople is a Berlin-based hiring platform combining a 400+ test skills and personality assessment library, automated AI reference checks, AI resume/application screening that scores candidates against job criteria, and AI screening calls.
§ The record
Harri is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HiPeople under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only HiPeople is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Harri | HiPeople |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harri 22 · HiPeople 84
11.2 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harri 35 · HiPeople 62
5.4 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harri 40 · HiPeople 60
2.4 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harri 44 · HiPeople 35
1.3 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harri 52 · HiPeople 62
1.2 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harri 52 · HiPeople 58
0.9 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harri 60 · HiPeople 66
0.5 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -20.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -20 beside that -20.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harri minus HiPeople.
| Category | Weight | Harri | HiPeople | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 62 | -27 | -5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 84 | -62 | -11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 44 | 35 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 66 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 61 (D) | -20 | -20.2 |
§ 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 | Harri | HiPeople | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiPeople sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 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