§ The result
2 points separate Factorial and Equalture.
Factorial (ATS-integrated) edges Equalture (Assessment) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 44. Equalture takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Factorial, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing are the same criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, and Equalture holds it (Equalture 40, Factorial 25, 18% weight), worth 100% of the weighted advantage Equalture builds across the 1 criterion it leads.
Vendor profile
Equalture
Equalture is a game-based pre-employment assessment platform whose short browser games measure candidates' cognitive abilities and behavioural tendencies and convert them into a Fit Score ranked against an employer-specific "Success Profile" derived from that employer's own top performers.
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
Equalture 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 Equalture is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Equalture | Factorial |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Low |
| Headquarters | NL | ES |
| Founded | 2018 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Equalture 40 · Factorial 25
2.7 weighted points to Equalture
20% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Equalture 45 · Factorial 52
1.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Equalture 38 · Factorial 48
1.2 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Equalture 50 · Factorial 58
1.0 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Equalture 30 · Factorial 35
0.8 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Equalture 55 · Factorial 57
0.3 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 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 -1.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Equalture minus Factorial.
| Category | Weight | Equalture | Factorial | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 25 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 46 (F) | -2 | -1.9 |
§ 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 | Equalture | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Equalture has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Equalture, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Equalture last reviewed
- August 2, 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