§ The result
Clevry leads Qureos by 12 points.
Clevry, filed under Assessment, comes out 12 points above Qureos, filed under Screening: 45 against 33 under rubric v1.0. Clevry leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Qureos leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Clevry 38, Qureos 12) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Clevry 52, Qureos 28), the second being 37% of the weighted advantage Clevry holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Clevry
Clevry is a UK psychometric assessment platform offering norm-referenced personality questionnaires, cognitive ability tests and situational judgement tests, plus recorded one-way video interviews, an interview builder, a skills-first ATS and an AI tool that maps job ads onto its personality scale library.
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
Clevry is filed under Assessment AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Clevry | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | AE |
| Founded | 1991 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Clevry 52 · Qureos 28
4.8 weighted points to Clevry
18% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Clevry 38 · Qureos 12
4.7 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Clevry 55 · Qureos 44
1.6 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Clevry 30 · Qureos 25
0.8 weighted points to Clevry
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Clevry 60 · Qureos 52
0.6 weighted points to Clevry
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Clevry 30 · Qureos 35
0.6 weighted points to Qureos
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Clevry 58 · Qureos 54
0.5 weighted points to Clevry
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Clevry minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Clevry | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 28 | +24 | +4.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 12 | +26 | +4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 44 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 33 (F) | +12 | +12.4 |
§ 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 | Clevry | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 39 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Clevry has 44 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 39 with a source URL, 5 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 Clevry sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 79 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 44 for Clevry, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Clevry 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