§ The result
Pinpoint leads Factorial on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under ATS-integrated, Pinpoint and Factorial come out 57 and 46 under rubric v1.0, 11 points in favour of Pinpoint. Pinpoint takes all 7 criteria and Factorial none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Factorial 35 to Pinpoint 38. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Factorial 52, Pinpoint 72, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint 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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
Factorial and Pinpoint are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Factorial | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | JE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Pinpoint 72
4.0 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Pinpoint 42
3.1 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Pinpoint 68
1.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Pinpoint 64
0.7 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Pinpoint 52
0.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Pinpoint 66
0.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Pinpoint 38
0.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 72 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 68 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 52 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 66 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 57 (F) | -11 | -10.8 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 3 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint last reviewed
- July 17, 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