§ The result
Factorial and TalentLens tie at 46.
Factorial (ATS-integrated) and TalentLens (Assessment) tie at 46 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Factorial leads 5 of the 7 criteria and TalentLens 1, with 1 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Factorial 25, TalentLens 45) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 100% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds across the 1 criterion 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
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, TalentLens 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 TalentLens is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | TalentLens |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | GB |
| Founded | 2016 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · TalentLens 45
3.6 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · TalentLens 32
1.9 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · TalentLens 50
1.1 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · TalentLens 30
0.8 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · TalentLens 58
0.2 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · TalentLens 57
0.1 weighted points to Factorial
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 7.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus TalentLens.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | TalentLens | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 45 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 32 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 46 (F) | - | +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 | TalentLens | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources 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; TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TalentLens 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