§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads Recruiterflow by 20 points.
Pymetrics (Harver Games) finishes 20 points clear of Recruiterflow under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 36 — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Recruiterflow takes 3 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 4 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80, Recruiterflow 18) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 53% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Recruiterflow
Recruiterflow is an ATS and CRM for recruiting agencies and executive search firms. Its AIRA AI layer ranks candidates already in a firm's database against each job with an explainable 0–100 Criteria Score (AIRA Matchmaker, shown as the 'AI Matches' card), and adds natural-language candidate search, external profile sourcing and an AI call notetaker that fills in interview scorecards.
§ The record
Pymetrics (Harver Games) is filed under Assessment AI, Recruiterflow under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Pymetrics (Harver Games) is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80 · Recruiterflow 18
11.2 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70 · Recruiterflow 33
7.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60 · Recruiterflow 44
2.4 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50 · Recruiterflow 58
1.0 weighted points to Recruiterflow
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25 · Recruiterflow 30
0.8 weighted points to Recruiterflow
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35 · Recruiterflow 33
0.2 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55 · Recruiterflow 56
0.1 weighted points to Recruiterflow
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +19.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +20 beside that +19.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pymetrics (Harver Games) minus Recruiterflow.
| Category | Weight | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Recruiterflow | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 33 | +37 | +7.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 18 | +62 | +11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 44 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 36 (F) | +20 | +19.4 |
§ 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 | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Recruiterflow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Pymetrics (Harver Games) has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; Recruiterflow has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 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 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for Recruiterflow, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pymetrics (Harver Games) last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruiterflow 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.