§ The result
Harver leads The Predictive Index by 8 points.
Harver scores 56 and The Predictive Index 48 under rubric v1.0 — an 8-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Harver and The Predictive Index each lead 2 of the 7 criteria, with 3 level, though the side of the split Harver holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Harver 80, The Predictive Index 45 — and at an 18% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 2 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
The Predictive Index
The Predictive Index provides validated behavioral and cognitive psychometric assessments used to screen, hire, and develop employees and design teams, alongside AI-assisted talent-management software.
§ The record
Harver and The Predictive Index are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Harver | The Predictive Index |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | NL | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1955 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harver 80 · The Predictive Index 45
6.3 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harver 65 · The Predictive Index 50
3.0 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harver 40 · The Predictive Index 43
0.4 weighted points to The Predictive Index
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harver 50 · The Predictive Index 52
0.2 weighted points to The Predictive Index
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +8.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harver minus The Predictive Index.
| Category | Weight | Harver | The Predictive Index | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 50 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 45 | +35 | +6.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 43 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 48 (F) | +8 | +8.7 |
§ 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 | The Predictive Index | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 6 | 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; The Predictive Index has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain, and 24 for The Predictive Index, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harver last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- The Predictive Index 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