§ The result
Harver leads ZipRecruiter by 16 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Harver (Assessment) opens a 16-point lead on ZipRecruiter (Sourcing), 56 to 40. Harver leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while ZipRecruiter leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Harver 80, ZipRecruiter 24 — and at an 18% weight it carries 59% 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
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
Harver is filed under Assessment AI, ZipRecruiter 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 | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | NL | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harver 80 · ZipRecruiter 24
10.1 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harver 65 · ZipRecruiter 40
5.0 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harver 35 · ZipRecruiter 27
1.2 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harver 50 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harver 60 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.5 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harver 55 · ZipRecruiter 52
0.4 weighted points to Harver
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +16.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +16.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harver minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Harver | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 40 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 24 | +56 | +10.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 40 (F) | +16 | +16.6 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Harver | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harver last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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.
§ Where next