§ The result
Factorial and Vervoe tie at 46.
Factorial, filed under ATS-integrated, and Vervoe, filed under Assessment, tie at 46 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Factorial leads 5 of the 7 criteria and Vervoe 2, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Factorial 25, Vervoe 52 — and at an 18% weight it carries 95% of the weighted advantage Vervoe holds across the 2 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
Vervoe
AI-powered skills-assessment platform that grades and ranks candidates on performance in role-specific, task-based assessments.
§ The record
Factorial is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Vervoe 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 Vervoe is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Factorial | Vervoe |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | ES | AU |
| Founded | 2016 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Factorial 25 · Vervoe 52
4.9 weighted points to Vervoe
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Factorial 48 · Vervoe 28
2.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Factorial 35 · Vervoe 25
1.5 weighted points to Factorial
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Factorial 52 · Vervoe 45
1.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Factorial 57 · Vervoe 55
0.3 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Factorial 58 · Vervoe 60
0.2 weighted points to Vervoe
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Factorial 60 · Vervoe 58
0.2 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.9 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 +0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Factorial minus Vervoe.
| Category | Weight | Factorial | Vervoe | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 52 | -27 | -4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 28 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 46 (F) | - | +0.7 |
§ 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 | Vervoe | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Vervoe has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 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 Vervoe, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Factorial last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Vervoe last reviewed
- June 7, 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