§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads Pulsifi by 23 points.
The Assessment cohort pairing of Pymetrics (Harver Games) and Pulsifi comes out 56 to 33 under rubric v1.0, a 23-point lead for Pymetrics (Harver Games). The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Pymetrics (Harver Games), with 1 level: Pymetrics (Harver Games) is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Pulsifi on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Pulsifi 20, 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
Pulsifi
Pulsifi gives candidates and employees 0-100 Role Fit and Organizational Fit scores that combine personality, work-interest, work-culture and cognitive assessments with AI resume and skills analysis, and uses the scores to rank people for hiring, internal mobility and succession.
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
Pulsifi 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, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pulsifi | Pymetrics (Harver Games) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pulsifi 20 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80
10.8 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pulsifi 30 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70
8.0 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pulsifi 40 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60
3.0 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pulsifi 28 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35
0.8 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pulsifi 46 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55
0.7 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pulsifi 55 · Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50
0.6 weighted points to Pulsifi
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -22.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -22.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pulsifi minus Pymetrics (Harver Games).
| Category | Weight | Pulsifi | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 70 | -40 | -8.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 80 | -60 | -10.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 56 (F) | -23 | -22.8 |
§ 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 | Pulsifi | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | 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% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 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 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain, and 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pulsifi last reviewed
- September 25, 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