§ The result
Factorial leads Mercor on all 7 criteria.
Factorial finishes 23 points clear of Mercor under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 23 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Factorial leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Mercor leads none. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap (Factorial 57, Mercor 22) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Factorial 52, Mercor 22), 26% of the weighted advantage Factorial builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Mercor
Mercor is an AI talent platform that runs automated 20-minute AI video interviews and semantic resume/profile matching to vet, score, and place candidates and expert contractors, and offers an enterprise applicant-screening product that scores employers' applicant pools against role rubrics with pass/fail recommendations.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Mercor under Screening 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 Mercor is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Mercor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | ES | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 2023 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Mercor 22
6.0 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Mercor 22
5.3 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Mercor 20
3.4 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Mercor 10
2.7 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Mercor 20
2.3 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Mercor 42
1.9 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Mercor 40
1.6 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +23.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +23 beside that +23.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Mercor.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Mercor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 22 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 10 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 22 | +35 | +5.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 20 | +28 | +3.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 40 | +20 | +1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 23 (F) | +23 | +23.1 |
§ 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 | Mercor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 10 | 8 | 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; Mercor has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Mercor, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercor 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