§ The result
3 points separate Qureos and Cognisess.
Qureos (Screening) edges Cognisess (Assessment) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 33 to 30. Cognisess takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Qureos, whose share includes Human Oversight Design. Cognisess takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Cognisess 20, Qureos 12), 100% of the weighted advantage it builds, while the widest raw gap is on Human Oversight Design, Cognisess 42 to Qureos 54.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
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
Cognisess 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, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | AE |
| Founded | 2011 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Qureos 12
1.4 weighted points to Cognisess
12% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Qureos 54
1.4 weighted points to Qureos
8% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Qureos 52
1.0 weighted points to Qureos
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Qureos 25
0.8 weighted points to Qureos
20% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Qureos 28
0.6 weighted points to Qureos
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Qureos 35
0.4 weighted points to Qureos
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Qureos 44
0.3 weighted points to Qureos
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -3.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 12 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 44 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 54 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 33 (F) | -3 | -3.0 |
§ 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 | Cognisess | 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% | 2 | 1 | — | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 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% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 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 Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess 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