§ The result
HiPeople leads Pymetrics (Harver Games) by 5 points.
HiPeople scores 61 (D) and Pymetrics (Harver Games) 56 (F) under rubric v1.0 — a 5-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. HiPeople leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads 2, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HiPeople 60, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35 — and at a 12% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiPeople
HiPeople is a Berlin-based hiring platform combining a 400+ test skills and personality assessment library, automated AI reference checks, AI resume/application screening that scores candidates against job criteria, and AI screening calls.
Vendor profile
Pymetrics (Harver Games)
Behavioral assessment using browser-based "games" that infer cognitive and emotional traits. Acquired by Harver in 2022 and folded into the Harver Games product line.
§ The record
HiPeople and Pymetrics (Harver Games) 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 | HiPeople | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiPeople 60 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35
3.0 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiPeople 62 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
1.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 65% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiPeople 35 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25
1.5 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiPeople 62 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
1.4 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiPeople 66 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.9 weighted points to HiPeople
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiPeople 84 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
0.7 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiPeople 58 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
0.3 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.4 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 +5.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiPeople minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | HiPeople | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 70 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 80 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 35 | +25 | +3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +0.9 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 56 (F) | +5 | +5.6 |
§ 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 | HiPeople | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Pymetrics (Harver Games) has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiPeople and Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiPeople last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pymetrics (Harver Games) 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