§ The result
Harri leads HireLogic by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Harri, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 41 and HireLogic, filed under Video interview, on 34, 7 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Harri: Harri is ahead on FRIA Support and HireLogic on Article 11 Technical Documentation. FRIA Support is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Harri 44, HireLogic 25, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Harri 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
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
§ The record
Harri is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HireLogic under Video interview 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 HireLogic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Harri | HireLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 29% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harri 44 · HireLogic 25
2.9 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harri 40 · HireLogic 28
1.4 weighted points to Harri
20% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harri 35 · HireLogic 42
1.4 weighted points to HireLogic
18% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harri 22 · HireLogic 15
1.3 weighted points to Harri
8% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harri 60 · HireLogic 45
1.2 weighted points to Harri
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harri 52 · HireLogic 45
1.1 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harri 52 · HireLogic 48
0.5 weighted points to Harri
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harri minus HireLogic.
| Category | Weight | Harri | HireLogic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 15 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 44 | 25 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 48 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 34 (F) | +7 | +6.9 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireLogic last reviewed
- September 25, 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