§ The result
4 points separate Factorial and Mercer | Mettl.
Factorial holds a 4-point edge over Mercer | Mettl under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Mercer | Mettl takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Factorial, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Mercer | Mettl — Factorial 25, Mercer | Mettl 42, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage Mercer | Mettl holds across the 1 criterion 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
Mercer | Mettl
Mercer | Mettl is an online talent assessment and remote-proctoring platform offering psychometric, aptitude, coding, and skills tests plus AI-assisted exam proctoring and scoring for hiring, certification, and L&D.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Mercer | Mettl under Assessment 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 Mercer | Mettl is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Mercer | Mettl |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | IN |
| Founded | 2016 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Mercer | Mettl 42
3.1 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
20% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Mercer | Mettl 38
2.8 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Mercer | Mettl 45
1.6 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Mercer | Mettl 38
1.2 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Mercer | Mettl 28
1.1 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Mercer | Mettl 52
0.6 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Mercer | Mettl 55
0.3 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Mercer | Mettl.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Mercer | Mettl | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 38 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 42 (F) | +4 | +4.5 |
§ 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 | Mercer | Mettl | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 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; Mercer | Mettl has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercer | Mettl 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