§ The result
Pymetrics (Harver Games) and Rippling tie at 56.
Pymetrics (Harver Games) (Assessment) and Rippling (ATS-integrated) tie at 56 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Pymetrics (Harver Games) leads 1 of the 7 criteria and Rippling 6, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80, Rippling 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage Pymetrics (Harver Games) holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
Pymetrics (Harver Games) is filed under Assessment AI, Rippling 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) | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 80 · Rippling 42
6.8 weighted points to Pymetrics (Harver Games)
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 25 · Rippling 45
3.0 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 35 · Rippling 47
1.4 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 50 · Rippling 60
1.2 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 55 · Rippling 64
0.7 weighted points to Rippling
20% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 70 · Rippling 73
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pymetrics (Harver Games) 60 · Rippling 64
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pymetrics (Harver Games) minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | Pymetrics (Harver Games) | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 73 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 42 | +38 | +6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 45 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 47 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 64 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 56 (F) | - | -0.7 |
§ 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) | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; 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 24 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Pymetrics (Harver Games), across 3 distinct source domains, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pymetrics (Harver Games) last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling last reviewed
- July 17, 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.