§ The result
Beamery leads Factorial by 15 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Beamery (Sourcing) opens a 15-point lead on Factorial (ATS-integrated), 61 (D) to 46 (F). Factorial takes 2 of the 7 criteria, FRIA Support among them, against 4 for Beamery, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Beamery 85, Factorial 25 — and at an 18% weight it carries 66% of the weighted advantage Beamery holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Beamery
Talent CRM and sourcing platform that maintains a long-lived candidate pipeline, with AI-driven matching and skills inference.
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
Beamery is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Factorial under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Factorial is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Beamery | Factorial |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | ES |
| Founded | 2013 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Beamery 85 · Factorial 25
10.8 weighted points to Beamery
20% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Beamery 70 · Factorial 52
3.6 weighted points to Beamery
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Beamery 60 · Factorial 48
1.4 weighted points to Beamery
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Beamery 30 · Factorial 35
0.8 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Beamery 60 · Factorial 57
0.4 weighted points to Beamery
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Beamery 55 · Factorial 58
0.4 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +15.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +15.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Beamery minus Factorial.
| Category | Weight | Beamery | Factorial | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 52 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 85 | 25 | +60 | +10.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 57 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 46 (F) | +15 | +15.2 |
§ 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 | Beamery | Factorial | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Beamery has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Beamery sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Beamery, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Beamery last reviewed
- May 21, 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