HomeCompareEmmersion vs Factorial

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Emmersion vs Factorial

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

2 points separate Factorial and Emmersion.

Factorial holds a 2-point edge over Emmersion under rubric v1.0, 46 to 44, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Emmersion takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 4 for Factorial, whose share includes Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. The advantage Factorial holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Emmersion 38, Factorial 48, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 33% of the weighted points Factorial gains across the 4 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Emmersion 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 Emmersion is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordEmmersionFactorial
Price tierMidLow
HeadquartersUSES
Founded20152016

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 12% weight · 23% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Emmersion 38 · Factorial 48

    1.2 weighted points to Factorial

  2. 15% weight · 44% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Emmersion 50 · Factorial 57

    1.1 weighted points to Factorial

  3. 20% weight · 63% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Emmersion 57 · Factorial 52

    1.0 weighted points to Emmersion

  4. 15% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Emmersion 30 · Factorial 35

    0.8 weighted points to Factorial

  5. 12% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Emmersion 53 · Factorial 58

    0.6 weighted points to Factorial

  6. 18% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Emmersion 28 · Factorial 25

    0.5 weighted points to Emmersion

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.1 — 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 -2.1.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Emmersion minus Factorial.

CategoryWeightEmmersionFactorialΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5752+5+1.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2825+3+0.5
FRIA Support15%3035-5-0.8
Data Governance Disclosure15%5057-7-1.1
Human Oversight Design12%5358-5-0.6
Post-Market Monitoring12%3848-10-1.2
Customer Documentation8%6060--
Total100%44 (F)46 (F)-2-2.1

§ 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.

CriterionWeightEmmersionFactorial
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%71Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%51Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%355Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain277Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Emmersion has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 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 Emmersion sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 74 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 40 for Emmersion, across 5 distinct source domains, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Emmersion 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.