§ The result
2 points separate Ceipal and Qureos.
Ceipal (ATS-integrated) edges Qureos (Screening) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 35 to 33. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Ceipal, with 1 level: Ceipal is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Qureos on Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Ceipal 20, Qureos 12) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 56% of the weighted advantage Ceipal holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
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
Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Qureos is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ceipal | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Qureos 12
1.4 weighted points to Ceipal
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Qureos 54
1.0 weighted points to Qureos
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Qureos 28
0.4 weighted points to Ceipal
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Qureos 35
0.4 weighted points to Ceipal
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Qureos 44
0.3 weighted points to Ceipal
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Qureos 52
0.1 weighted points to Ceipal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +1.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +1.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 12 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 44 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 54 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 52 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 33 (F) | +2 | +1.6 |
§ 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 | Ceipal | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Qureos has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 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