§ The result
1 point separates Interviewer.AI and Factorial.
Interviewer.AI holds a 1-point edge over Factorial under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46, across the Video interview and ATS-integrated cohorts. Factorial takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Post-Market Monitoring among them, against 3 for Interviewer.AI, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 2 are level. Post-Market Monitoring is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Factorial — Factorial 48, Interviewer.AI 32, on a 12% weight — which is 92% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 2 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
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Interviewer.AI under Video interview 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 Interviewer.AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Interviewer.AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | SG |
| Founded | 2016 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Interviewer.AI 32
1.9 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Interviewer.AI 35
1.8 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.4 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.2 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Interviewer.AI 58
0.2 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.6 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 -0.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Interviewer.AI.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Interviewer.AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 32 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 47 (F) | -1 | -0.4 |
§ 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 | Interviewer.AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 12 | 6 | 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; Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Interviewer.AI last reviewed
- June 7, 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