§ The result
Factorial leads Recruitly by 5 points.
Inside the ATS-integrated cohort, rubric v1.0 puts Factorial on 46 and Recruitly on 41, 5 points apart. Factorial leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Recruitly leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (Factorial 57, Recruitly 45) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Factorial 25, Recruitly 15), the second being 33% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 5 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
Recruitly
Recruitly is an all-in-one ATS and CRM for recruitment agencies. It includes AI candidate matching, which ranks candidates against live jobs and shows its reasons, and AI application review, which scores and explains each applicant against the job spec. It also offers external profile sourcing, CV parsing, an AI phone system and an AI meeting assistant.
§ The record
Factorial and Recruitly 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 | Recruitly |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Low |
| Headquarters | ES | AE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Recruitly 15
1.8 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Recruitly 45
1.8 weighted points to Factorial
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Recruitly 45
1.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Recruitly 45
0.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Recruitly 60
0.2 weighted points to Recruitly
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Recruitly 58
0.2 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Recruitly.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Recruitly | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 15 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 45 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 45 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 41 (F) | +5 | +5.3 |
§ 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 | Recruitly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 32 | 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; Recruitly has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
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 Recruitly, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruitly 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