§ The result
Alooba leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
Alooba scores 38 and Qureos 33 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Alooba is ahead of Qureos on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Data Governance Disclosure at Alooba 45 to Qureos 44. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Alooba 40, Qureos 28) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage Alooba holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Alooba
Alooba sells online skills assessments (auto-graded SQL, Python/R, multiple-choice and data-analysis tests, plus manually graded free-response and one-way video questions) that employers use to screen, benchmark and optionally auto-reject job candidates.
Vendor profile
Qureos
Qureos is a Dubai-based AI recruiting platform whose Iris agents source candidates, score and rank applicants against recruiter-set criteria, and run AI voice and video interviews with personality scoring, alongside an ATS and a job-seeker marketplace focused on MENA and South Asia.
§ The record
Alooba is filed under Assessment AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Alooba | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | AE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Alooba 40 · Qureos 28
2.4 weighted points to Alooba
18% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Alooba 22 · Qureos 12
1.8 weighted points to Alooba
8% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Alooba 58 · Qureos 52
0.5 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Alooba 28 · Qureos 25
0.4 weighted points to Alooba
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Alooba 45 · Qureos 44
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Alooba 55 · Qureos 54
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Alooba 36 · Qureos 35
0.1 weighted points to Alooba
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.5 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 +5.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Alooba minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Alooba | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 12 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 35 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 33 (F) | +5 | +5.5 |
§ 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 | Alooba | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 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% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Alooba has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Qureos has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Alooba sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Alooba, across 3 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Alooba last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Qureos 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