HomeCompareHogan Assessments vs Pymetrics (Harver Games)

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Hogan Assessments vs Pymetrics (Harver Games)

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Pymetrics (Harver Games) takes the total, Hogan Assessments takes more of the criteria.

Pymetrics (Harver Games) scores 56 and Hogan Assessments 47 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Hogan Assessments leads more of the criteria than Pymetrics (Harver Games) — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Pymetrics (Harver Games). Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Hogan Assessments 44, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 55% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Hogan Assessments 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.

RecordHogan AssessmentsPymetrics (Harver Games)
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded19872013

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 44% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Hogan Assessments 44 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80

    6.5 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)

  2. 20% weight · 71% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Hogan Assessments 50 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70

    4.0 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)

  3. 15% weight · 82% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Hogan Assessments 36 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25

    1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  4. 15% weight · 90% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Hogan Assessments 52 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60

    1.2 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)

  5. 12% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Hogan Assessments 40 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35

    0.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  6. 8% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Hogan Assessments 62 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55

    0.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Hogan Assessments 52 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50

    0.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -8.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Hogan Assessments minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).

CategoryWeightHogan AssessmentsPymetrics (Harver Games)Δ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5070-20-4.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%4480-36-6.5
FRIA Support15%3625+11+1.6
Data Governance Disclosure15%5260-8-1.2
Human Oversight Design12%5250+2+0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%4035+5+0.6
Customer Documentation8%6255+7+0.6
Total100%47 (F)56 (F)-9-8.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHogan AssessmentsPymetrics (Harver Games)
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain01
Data Governance Disclosure15%31Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11
Customer Documentation8%40Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%206Sources on the vendor's own domain92Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 6 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 Pymetrics (Harver Games) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Hogan Assessments last reviewed
July 17, 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.