§ The result
Factorial leads Intervue.io on all 7 criteria.
Factorial finishes 15 points clear of Intervue.io under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 31 — across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. Factorial leads every one of the 7 criteria, Intervue.io none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Factorial 58 to Intervue.io 54. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Factorial 52, Intervue.io 28, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 31% 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
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Intervue.io 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 Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Intervue.io |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | IN |
| Founded | 2016 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Intervue.io 28
4.8 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Intervue.io 38
2.9 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Intervue.io 12
2.3 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Intervue.io 30
2.2 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Intervue.io 22
1.9 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Intervue.io 50
0.8 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Intervue.io 54
0.5 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +15.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Intervue.io.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Intervue.io | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 28 | +24 | +4.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 12 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 38 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 31 (F) | +15 | +15.4 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 5 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Intervue.io 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