§ The result
Factorial leads Aon Assessment by 11 points.
Factorial, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 11 points above Aon Assessment, filed under Assessment: 46 against 35 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Factorial: Factorial is ahead on Data Governance Disclosure and Aon Assessment on Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Aon Assessment 25, Factorial 48) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Aon Assessment 38, Factorial 57), the second being 24% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Aon Assessment
Aon Assessment Solutions (formerly cut-e) provides enterprise pre-hire psychometric assessments - ability, personality (ADEPT-15), situational-judgement, gamified cognitive (smartPredict/gridChallenge) tests and an AI-scored video interview tool (vidAssess-AI) - used to screen and rank job applicants at scale.
Vendor profile
Factorial
Factorial is a Barcelona-based all-in-one HR, finance and IT platform for small and mid-sized businesses. Its applicant tracking system has optional AI matching, which shows a percentage fit for applicants it recommends interviewing, plus CV summaries, AI-written job posts and AI Calls, where a voice agent phone-screens candidates and gives each a match label that can move them to the next stage automatically.
§ The record
Aon Assessment is filed under Assessment AI, Factorial under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Aon Assessment is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Aon Assessment | Factorial |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | DE | ES |
| Founded | 2002 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 22% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Factorial 57
2.9 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Factorial 48
2.8 weighted points to Factorial
20% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Factorial 52
2.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Factorial 58
1.6 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Factorial 35
1.5 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Factorial 60
1.0 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Factorial 25
0.9 weighted points to Aon Assessment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Factorial.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Factorial | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 57 | -19 | -2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 48 | -23 | -2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 46 (F) | -11 | -11.1 |
§ 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 | Aon Assessment | Factorial | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Aon Assessment has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Aon Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Factorial 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.
§ Where next