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.
Assessment

HireAIScore rates Pymetrics (Harver Games) 56 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed May 21, 2026. Pymetrics (Harver Games) ranks 11 of 82 vendors rated in Assessment AI, against a category average of 46. That score is drawn from 11 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for Pymetrics (Harver Games) — 9 with a cited source, 2 recording that nothing was located.

Score breakdown

Pymetrics (Harver Games), criterion by criterion

Each rubric criterion is scored out of 100 on the cited evidence, then weighted into the total.

Weighted contribution shown to the right of each bar.

  1. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Weight 20% · avg 50

    70

    +14.0

  2. Bias Audit Transparency

    Weight 18% · avg 41

    80

    +14.4

  3. FRIA Support

    Weight 15% · avg 31

    25

    +3.8

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    Weight 15% · avg 53

    60

    +9.0

  5. Human Oversight Design

    Weight 12% · avg 55

    50

    +6.0

  6. Post-Market Monitoring

    Weight 12% · avg 38

    35

    +4.2

  7. Customer Documentation

    Weight 8% · avg 58

    55

    +4.4

Total weighted score

55.8(rounded to 56 for display)

Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 82 Assessment AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.

Strongest criterion

Bias Audit Transparency

80raw / 100

Contributes 14.4 to the total. 80 against a 41 category average.

Weakest criterion

FRIA Support

25raw / 100

Contributes 3.8 to the total. 25 against a 31 category average.

Cited evidence

The evidence behind the score

Every score is backed by at least one cited piece of evidence. Open a criterion to see what was found, when, and where.

Download diligence record

Evidence ledger

Items
11
Documentation
6
Audit report
2
Public statement
1
Absence
2
With a source URL
9 of 11
Source hostnames
3
Fewest items
1
FRIA Support

These figures measure how thoroughly Pymetrics (Harver Games) was reviewed, not how Pymetrics (Harver Games) performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.

Article 11 Technical Documentation

2 items70

Bias Audit Transparency

2 items80

FRIA Support

1 item25
  • AbsenceCaptured May 21, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-05-21.

    Where we looked: https://harver.com/resources - no FRIA template located, FAccT paper covers model design but not deployer-facing FRIA inputs.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Data Governance Disclosure

1 item60

Human Oversight Design

1 item50

Post-Market Monitoring

2 items35

Customer Documentation

2 items55

Editorial notes

Company overview

Pymetrics built browser-based "games"- short interactive tasks - whose candidate behaviour the system uses to infer cognitive and emotional traits relevant to job fit. Harver acquired Pymetrics in 2022 and the product now sits in Harver's catalogue as Harver Games. Pre-acquisition Pymetrics was one of the earliest vendors to commission third-party bias audits with O'Neil Risk Consulting & Algorithmic Auditing (ORCAA).

Regulatory exposure

Games-based assessment is regulated as pre-employment assessment under every jurisdiction that covers AI hiring. The "games" framing does not change the legal characterization - outputs that affect hiring decisions are inside Annex III §4 under the EU AI Act and inside NYC LL 144 in New York. Pymetrics' historical audit cadence is the baseline against which the current Harver-owned product is judged.

Path to a higher score

To move into the B band on this rubric, Harver Games would need to publish (a) a current NYC LL 144 bias audit specifically for the games product, (b) confirmation of audit cadence post-acquisition (annual or better), and (c) a system card explaining what traits the games infer and how those inferences are validated.

Regulatory frame

What applies to assessment AI.

Assessment is the most-regulated surface in AI hiring. NYC LL 144, EEOC and OFCCP frameworks, Illinois HB 3773, and EU AI Act Annex III §4 all apply, with overlap on bias-audit obligations.

Keep reading

All assessment vendorsHow this score is builtAnnex IV section-by-section: what AI hiring vendors must documentWhat makes a defensible NYC LL 144 bias audit

Compare

Pymetrics (Harver Games) against its nearest-scoring peers.

The closest scores in Assessment AI, side by side.

Build any comparison

Ranking

Others rated in Assessment AI

Ranked 11 of 82 by weighted total under rubric v1.0. The ordering is arithmetic on the rubric and carries no view on which tool suits a given hiring process.

  1. #8Sapia.ai56F
  2. #9Cornerstone OnDemand56F
  3. #10iMocha56F
  4. #11Pymetrics (Harver Games)This profile56F
  5. #12HackerRank55F
  6. #13Plum54F
All assessment vendors

Conflicts of interest

No vendor pays for placement, scoring, or removal. Casework - the consulting firm that operates this directory - provides paid services to some vendors. Any active or recent (within 24 months) commercial relationship is disclosed on the affected vendor profile and the review is reassigned to an independent reviewer. See the full policy on About.

Casework has no commercial relationship with this vendor.