§ The result
Harver leads SHL by 5 points.
Harver scores 56 and SHL 51 under rubric v1.0 — a 5-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Harver leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while SHL leads 2, including Human Oversight Design, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Harver 80, SHL 50 — and at an 18% weight it carries 76% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 3 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
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
Harver and SHL 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 | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | NL | GB |
| Founded | 2015 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harver 80 · SHL 50
5.4 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harver 65 · SHL 60
1.0 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harver 50 · SHL 58
1.0 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harver 35 · SHL 30
0.8 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harver 55 · SHL 58
0.4 weighted points to SHL
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +5.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harver minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | Harver | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 60 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 50 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 51 (F) | +5 | +5.7 |
§ 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 | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 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 29 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harver last reviewed
- May 21, 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