§ The result
Factorial leads TestDome on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Factorial, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 46 and TestDome, filed under Assessment, on 37, 9 points apart. TestDome is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Factorial takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, Factorial 58 to TestDome 52. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Factorial 48, TestDome 30) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Factorial 52, TestDome 40), the second being 26% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 6 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
TestDome
TestDome sells pay-per-candidate online skills tests for coding, Excel and more than 100 other skills. The tests are scored automatically, and open-ended answers can be scored by AI. AI analysis of webcam and screen proctoring recordings flags possible cheating, and a live code-interview tool is included.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, TestDome 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 TestDome is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | TestDome |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Low |
| Headquarters | ES | HR |
| Founded | 2016 | 2013 |
§ 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 · TestDome 40
2.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · TestDome 30
2.2 weighted points to Factorial
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · TestDome 15
1.8 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · TestDome 28
1.1 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · TestDome 50
1.1 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · TestDome 52
0.7 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +9.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus TestDome.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | TestDome | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 15 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 37 (F) | +9 | +9.2 |
§ 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 | TestDome | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 5 | 1 | 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 | 27 | 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; TestDome has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for TestDome, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TestDome 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