§ The result
2 points separate Avature and Factorial.
Avature holds a 2-point edge over Factorial under rubric v1.0, 48 to 46, with both scored in the ATS-integrated cohort. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of Avature, with 1 level: Avature is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Factorial on Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Avature 40, Factorial 25) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 73% of the weighted advantage Avature holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Avature
Avature is an enterprise talent acquisition and talent management platform (recruiting CRM, ATS, onboarding and internal mobility) with built-in AI for semantic search, explainable weighted candidate matching and ranking, candidate fraud detection and configurable recruiting agents.
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
Avature and Factorial are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Avature | Factorial |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | ES |
| Founded | 2004 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Avature 40 · Factorial 25
2.7 weighted points to Avature
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Avature 40 · Factorial 48
1.0 weighted points to Factorial
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Avature 55 · Factorial 52
0.6 weighted points to Avature
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Avature 32 · Factorial 35
0.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Avature 60 · Factorial 58
0.2 weighted points to Avature
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Avature 58 · Factorial 57
0.1 weighted points to Avature
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +2.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Avature minus Factorial.
| Category | Weight | Avature | Factorial | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 25 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 48 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 46 (F) | +2 | +2.3 |
§ 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 | Avature | Factorial | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Avature has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 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 Avature sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Avature, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Avature last reviewed
- September 25, 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