The result

SHL leads Harri by 10 points.

SHL sits 10 points above Harri under rubric v1.0 — 51 against 41 — with SHL filed under Assessment and Harri under ATS-integrated. The 7 criteria split 4 to 1 in favour of SHL, with 2 level: SHL is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Harri on FRIA Support. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Harri 22, SHL 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage SHL holds across the 4 criteria it leads.

Criteria won

7 criteria

  • Harri1
  • SHL4
  • Level2
Widest raw gap
Bias Audit Transparency22 vs 50
Heaviest weighted swing
Bias Audit Transparency18% weight

The record

Categories, scope and company facts.

Harri is filed under ATS-integrated AI, SHL under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

RecordHarriSHL
Price tierEnterpriseEnterprise
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded20121977

What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. Bias Audit Transparency

    18% weight37% of the movement so far

    Harri22
    SHL50

    5.0 weighted points to SHL

  2. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    20% weight73% of the movement so far

    Harri35
    SHL60

    5.0 weighted points to SHL

  3. FRIA Support

    15% weight88% of the movement so far

    Harri44
    SHL30

    2.1 weighted points to Harri

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    15% weight95% of the movement so far

    Harri52
    SHL58

    0.9 weighted points to SHL

  5. Human Oversight Design

    12% weight100% of the movement so far

    Harri52
    SHL58

    0.7 weighted points to SHL

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -9.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -9.6.

Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Harri minus SHL, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.

CategoryWeightHarriSHLΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3560-25-5.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2250-28-5.0
FRIA Support15%4430+14+2.1
Data Governance Disclosure15%5258-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5258-6-0.7
Post-Market Monitoring12%4040--
Customer Documentation8%6060--
Total100%41F51F-10-9.6

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.

CriterionWeightHarriSHL
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%22Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%41Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%198Sources on the vendor's own domain154Sources on the vendor's own domain

Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Harri last reviewed
August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
SHL 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