§ The result
Pinpoint leads Harri by 16 points.
Pinpoint finishes 16 points clear of Harri inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 57 against 41. Pinpoint leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Harri leads 1, including FRIA Support. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Harri 35, Pinpoint 72 — and at a 20% weight it carries 44% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint 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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
Harri and Pinpoint 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 | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | JE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harri 35 · Pinpoint 72
7.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harri 22 · Pinpoint 42
3.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harri 52 · Pinpoint 68
2.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harri 52 · Pinpoint 64
1.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harri 40 · Pinpoint 52
1.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harri 44 · Pinpoint 38
0.9 weighted points to Harri
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harri 60 · Pinpoint 66
0.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -15.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -16 beside that -15.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harri minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | Harri | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 72 | -37 | -7.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 44 | 38 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 68 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 64 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 66 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 57 (F) | -16 | -15.9 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint last reviewed
- July 17, 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