§ The result
Factorial leads Harri by 5 points.
Factorial finishes 5 points ahead of Harri under rubric v1.0, 46 to 41, both scored as ATS-integrated entries. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Factorial, with 1 level: Factorial is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Harri on FRIA Support. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Factorial 52, Harri 35) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 53% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Harri
Harri is a frontline workforce platform for hospitality, grocery and care employers whose pre-hire suite pairs a career portal and applicant tracking system with Carri, a conversational AI assistant that screens applicants and coordinates interviews, plus an agentic AI layer (Salli) for scheduling and labor-law compliance.
§ The record
Factorial and Harri 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 | Factorial | Harri |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | ES | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Harri 35
3.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Harri 44
1.3 weighted points to Harri
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Harri 40
1.0 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Harri 52
0.8 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Harri 52
0.7 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Harri 22
0.5 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Harri.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Harri | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 22 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 44 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 40 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 41 (F) | +5 | +5.0 |
§ 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 | Factorial | Harri | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 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