§ The result
4 points separate Harver and Phenom.
Harver (Assessment) edges Phenom (Sourcing) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 56 to 52. Harver leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Phenom leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Harver 65, Phenom 55, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
Vendor profile
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
§ The record
Harver is filed under Assessment AI, Phenom under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Harver is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Harver | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | NL | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harver 65 · Phenom 55
2.0 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harver 35 · Phenom 25
1.5 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harver 50 · Phenom 60
1.2 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harver 40 · Phenom 30
1.2 weighted points to Harver
18% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harver 80 · Phenom 75
0.9 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harver 55 · Phenom 60
0.8 weighted points to Phenom
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harver 60 · Phenom 55
0.4 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 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 +4.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harver minus Phenom.
| Category | Weight | Harver | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 55 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 75 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 52 (F) | +4 | +4.1 |
§ 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 | Harver | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 documented absences; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 20 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harver last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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