§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads Mercer | Mettl by 14 points.
Pymetrics (Harver Games) sits 14 points above Mercer | Mettl under rubric v1.0, 56 against 42, with both filed under Assessment. Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Mercer | Mettl leads 2, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Mercer | Mettl 42, Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80 — and at an 18% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Mercer | Mettl
Mercer | Mettl is an online talent assessment and remote-proctoring platform offering psychometric, aptitude, coding, and skills tests plus AI-assisted exam proctoring and scoring for hiring, certification, and L&D.
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
Mercer | Mettl 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 | Mercer | Mettl | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2010 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Mercer | Mettl 42 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
6.8 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
20% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Mercer | Mettl 38 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
6.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Mercer | Mettl 55 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
0.8 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Mercer | Mettl 45 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
0.6 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Mercer | Mettl 28 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25
0.4 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Mercer | Mettl 38 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35
0.4 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Mercer | Mettl 52 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.2 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -14.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Mercer | Mettl minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | Mercer | Mettl | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 70 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 80 | -38 | -6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 56 (F) | -14 | -14.0 |
§ 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 | Mercer | Mettl | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Mercer | Mettl has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 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 25 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Mercer | Mettl last reviewed
- June 7, 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