HomeCompareHarri vs TestDome

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Harri vs TestDome

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

4 points separate Harri and TestDome.

Harri (ATS-integrated) edges TestDome (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 41 to 37. Harri leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including FRIA Support, while TestDome leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 2 are level. One criterion, FRIA Support, is both the widest raw gap (Harri 44, TestDome 28) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 15% weight it makes up 47% of the weighted advantage Harri holds across the 4 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Harri is filed under ATS-integrated AI, TestDome 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 TestDome is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordHarriTestDome
Price tierEnterpriseLow
HeadquartersUSHR
Founded20122013

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 15% weight · 39% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Harri 44 · TestDome 28

    2.4 weighted points to Harri

  2. 18% weight · 59% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Harri 22 · TestDome 15

    1.3 weighted points to Harri

  3. 12% weight · 79% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Harri 40 · TestDome 30

    1.2 weighted points to Harri

  4. 20% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Harri 35 · TestDome 40

    1.0 weighted points to TestDome

  5. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Harri 52 · TestDome 50

    0.3 weighted points to Harri

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +4.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Harri minus TestDome.

CategoryWeightHarriTestDomeΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3540-5-1.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2215+7+1.3
FRIA Support15%4428+16+2.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5250+2+0.3
Human Oversight Design12%5252--
Post-Market Monitoring12%4030+10+1.2
Customer Documentation8%6060--
Total100%41 (F)37 (F)+4+4.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHarriTestDome
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%22Sources on the vendor's own domain31—
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11—
Data Governance Disclosure15%41Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%198Sources on the vendor's own domain275Sources on the vendor's own domain

Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; TestDome has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.

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 TestDome, across 1 distinct source domain.

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