Fritz 16, Deep HIARCS or Shredder – which one is most "human"?

I use all 3. All of them have a "match the human player's ELO" feature, i.e. the engine dumbs itself down to your playing level. All 3 engines are touted as being able to play fairly "human-like".

Do any of you have any strong feelings, though, about which of these 3 engines plays most like a human player, even at lower levels?

I've not tested them extensively, but my feeling so far is that HIARCS plays more like a human than Fritz does. I've seen Fritz play some moves that you wouldn't expect even a weak human player to play.

At the moment, my setup is to use HIARCS for sparring and Fritz for deep "verbose" analysis.

Thanks for your thoughts on this matter!

Thanks. Can you elaborate a bit on why you think so?

Thanks. I have Shredder on my Android tablet. I've liked what I've seen so far. 

Does it play dumb moves no human would play (e.g. moving king towards the centre in the middlegame) even at lower levels?

Thanks for your thoughts, mate

Hiarcs may not be the fastest engine out there, but imo it plays the most "humanlike" chess of all engines.

For analysis use the free stockfish engine.

While there is plenty of information on how to make a chess engine stronger, I haven't found much about how one can make a chess engine produce more humanlike play, such as Komodo is reputed to exhibit. I suppose one technique would be to let the computer spend a small fraction of its time running a weaker "humanlike" chess algorithm that is based on selective search, and/or on the basis of picking a goal based on the pattern of the position and then sticking to it (Chess Skill in Man and Machine contained a paper on one lightweight engine designed on that principle)... and then, after the main chess program has evaluated the possible moves, if the moves suggested by the humanlike engines are among the acceptable ones, taking one of those moves.