§ The result
4 points separate Factorial and Tengai.
Factorial (ATS-integrated) edges Tengai (Screening) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42. Factorial leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Tengai leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. The advantage Factorial holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Factorial 48, Tengai 33, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 32% of the weighted points Factorial gains across the 5 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
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Tengai 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 Tengai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | SE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Tengai 33
1.8 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Tengai 33
1.4 weighted points to Tengai
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Tengai 45
1.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Tengai 28
1.1 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Tengai 50
1.1 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Tengai 55
0.4 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +4.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 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 +4.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 33 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 33 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 42 (F) | +4 | +4.3 |
§ 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 | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 37 | 5 | Sources 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; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai 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