§ The result
ClearCo (ClearCompany) leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
ClearCo (ClearCompany) sits 13 points above Qureos under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 33 — with ClearCo (ClearCompany) filed under ATS-integrated and Qureos under Screening. ClearCo (ClearCompany) leads every one of the 7 criteria, Qureos none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, ClearCo (ClearCompany) 37 to Qureos 35. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (ClearCo (ClearCompany) 56, Qureos 28) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage ClearCo (ClearCompany) holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
ClearCo (ClearCompany)
ClearCo (formerly ClearCompany) is a unified talent-management suite built around an applicant tracking system. Its AI Talent Match scores and ranks new applicants against a requisition's skills and job titles, and its Sourcing Agent runs AI-conducted phone screening calls and returns applicants ranked by score.
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
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 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, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Qureos is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 2004 | 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
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 56 · Qureos 28
5.6 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 28 · Qureos 12
2.9 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 57 · Qureos 44
1.9 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 63 · Qureos 54
1.1 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 30 · Qureos 25
0.8 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 60 · Qureos 52
0.6 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 37 · Qureos 35
0.2 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +13.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +13.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ClearCo (ClearCompany) minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 56 | 28 | +28 | +5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 12 | +16 | +2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 44 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 54 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 37 | 35 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 33 (F) | +13 | +13.1 |
§ 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 | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 2 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
ClearCo (ClearCompany) has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 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; some documentation or audit rows for ClearCo (ClearCompany) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for ClearCo (ClearCompany), across 3 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ClearCo (ClearCompany) 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