§ The result
1 point separates Harri and Oleeo.
Within the ATS-integrated cohort, Harri edges Oleeo by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 41 to 40. Harri leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including FRIA Support, while Oleeo leads 3, including Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Oleeo takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Harri 22 to Oleeo 40, 70% of the weighted advantage Oleeo holds — while the widest raw gap sits on FRIA Support, Harri 44 to Oleeo 25.
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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
Harri and Oleeo are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Harri | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2012 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harri 22 · Oleeo 40
3.2 weighted points to Oleeo
15% weight · 60% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harri 44 · Oleeo 25
2.9 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harri 40 · Oleeo 30
1.2 weighted points to Harri
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harri 52 · Oleeo 45
1.1 weighted points to Harri
20% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harri 35 · Oleeo 40
1.0 weighted points to Oleeo
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harri 60 · Oleeo 55
0.4 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harri 52 · Oleeo 55
0.4 weighted points to Oleeo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +0.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harri minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | Harri | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 40 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 44 | 25 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 40 (F) | +1 | +0.9 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 10 | 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; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo last reviewed
- June 7, 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