HomeCompareCovey vs Factorial

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Covey vs Factorial

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Covey takes the total, Factorial takes more of the criteria.

Covey (Sourcing) edges Factorial (ATS-integrated) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46. Factorial leads more of the criteria than Covey — 6 to 1 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Covey leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Covey. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Covey 72, Factorial 25) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 100% of the weighted advantage Covey holds across the 1 criterion it leads.

§ The record

Covey is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Factorial under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.

RecordCoveyFactorial
Price tierMidLow
HeadquartersUSES
Founded20182016

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 52% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Covey 72 · Factorial 25

    8.5 weighted points to Covey

  2. 20% weight · 67% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Covey 40 · Factorial 52

    2.4 weighted points to Factorial

  3. 12% weight · 81% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Covey 30 · Factorial 48

    2.2 weighted points to Factorial

  4. 15% weight · 90% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Covey 25 · Factorial 35

    1.5 weighted points to Factorial

  5. 15% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Covey 52 · Factorial 57

    0.8 weighted points to Factorial

  6. 12% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Covey 52 · Factorial 58

    0.7 weighted points to Factorial

  7. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Covey 58 · Factorial 60

    0.2 weighted points to Factorial

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +0.8.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Covey minus Factorial.

CategoryWeightCoveyFactorialΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4052-12-2.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%7225+47+8.5
FRIA Support15%2535-10-1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%5257-5-0.8
Human Oversight Design12%5258-6-0.7
Post-Market Monitoring12%3048-18-2.2
Customer Documentation8%5860-2-0.2
Total100%47 (F)46 (F)+1+0.8

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCoveyFactorial
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%11Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%20Audit reportSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%01—41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%01—41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%11Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%01—41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%20Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%65Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain277Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Covey has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 5 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 Covey 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 Covey, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Covey 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.