§ The result
Factorial leads HireQuotient on all 7 criteria.
Factorial, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 12 points above HireQuotient, filed under Sourcing: 46 against 34 under rubric v1.0. Factorial takes all 7 criteria from HireQuotient without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Human Oversight Design, Factorial 58 to HireQuotient 57. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Factorial 48, HireQuotient 30) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Factorial 52, HireQuotient 35), the second being 28% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
HireQuotient
EasySource by HireQuotient is an AI recruiting platform for North American frontline employers that sources and scores candidates from LinkedIn, the open web and partner databases, verifies licences, automates outreach including AI voice calls, and adds an ATS, interview scheduling, and skills, cognitive and AI-scored video assessments.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HireQuotient under Candidate sourcing 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. Only HireQuotient is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | HireQuotient |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Low |
| Headquarters | ES | SG |
| Founded | 2016 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · HireQuotient 35
3.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · HireQuotient 40
2.5 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · HireQuotient 30
2.2 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · HireQuotient 22
1.9 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · HireQuotient 18
1.3 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · HireQuotient 50
0.8 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · HireQuotient 57
0.1 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus HireQuotient.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | HireQuotient | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 18 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 40 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 34 (F) | +12 | +12.2 |
§ 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 | Factorial | HireQuotient | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 5 | 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; HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireQuotient 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