§ The result
Dayforce leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Dayforce (ATS-integrated) opens a 24-point lead on Qureos (Screening), 57 to 33. Dayforce leads every one of the 7 criteria, Qureos none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Dayforce 47 to Qureos 35. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Dayforce 74, Qureos 28, 20% weight), is only 38% of the weighted advantage Dayforce builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Dayforce
Dayforce is an enterprise human capital management platform whose Dayforce Recruiting module uses AI to assign letter grades to external job applicants, generate job descriptions, and automate screening and hiring workflows alongside HR, payroll, time, talent, and 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
Dayforce is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | Dayforce | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 1992 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Dayforce 74 · Qureos 28
9.2 weighted points to Dayforce
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Dayforce 42 · Qureos 12
5.4 weighted points to Dayforce
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Dayforce 63 · Qureos 44
2.9 weighted points to Dayforce
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Dayforce 40 · Qureos 25
2.3 weighted points to Dayforce
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Dayforce 68 · Qureos 54
1.7 weighted points to Dayforce
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Dayforce 47 · Qureos 35
1.4 weighted points to Dayforce
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Dayforce 70 · Qureos 52
1.4 weighted points to Dayforce
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +24.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +24 beside that +24.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Dayforce minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Dayforce | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 74 | 28 | +46 | +9.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 12 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 40 | 25 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 63 | 44 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 68 | 54 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 35 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 70 | 52 | +18 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 33 (F) | +24 | +24.3 |
§ 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 | Dayforce | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Dayforce 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Dayforce, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Dayforce last reviewed
- August 2, 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