§ The result
1 point separates Knockri and Factorial.
Knockri holds a 1-point edge over Factorial under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46, across the Video interview and ATS-integrated cohorts. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to Factorial and Knockri, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Knockri holds, headed by Bias Audit Transparency, settle the total. Knockri takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Factorial 25, Knockri 35), which is 68% of the weighted advantage Knockri holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Post-Market Monitoring, Factorial 48 to Knockri 35.
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
Knockri
Knockri runs asynchronous structured behavioural interviews that candidates answer by audio, video or text; it transcribes the answers, uses NLP models to score the work-related behaviours they describe against a skills framework, and produces per-skill scores and ranked shortlists.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Knockri under Video interview AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Knockri is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Knockri |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | CA |
| Founded | 2016 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Knockri 35
1.8 weighted points to Knockri
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Knockri 35
1.6 weighted points to Factorial
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Knockri 55
0.6 weighted points to Knockri
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Knockri 55
0.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Knockri 55
0.3 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Knockri 60
0.2 weighted points to Knockri
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.9 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 Knockri.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Knockri | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 35 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| 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 | Knockri | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 36 | 5 | 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; Knockri has 41 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 36 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Knockri sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 75 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 41 for Knockri, across 7 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Knockri 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