Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Entelo vs Qureos
Entelo
Entelo is an AI-powered talent sourcing and diversity-recruiting platform that aggregates hundreds of millions of public candidate profiles and applies predictive machine-learning models to score, rank, and surface (including underrepresented) candidates for recruiters.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
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.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
Entelo and Qureos tie at 33.
Entelo, filed under Sourcing, and Qureos, filed under Screening, tie at 33 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Entelo leads 3 of the 7 criteria and Qureos 2, with 2 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Entelo takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Entelo 20, Qureos 12), which is 72% of the weighted advantage Entelo holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Human Oversight Design, Entelo 42 to Qureos 54.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Entelo3
- Qureos2
- Level2
- Widest raw gap
- Human Oversight Design42 vs 54
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Entelo is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Qureos is in scope of
| Record | Entelo | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 2011 | 2021 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight33% of the movement so far
Entelo20Qureos121.4 weighted points to Entelo
- 2
Human Oversight Design
12% weight66% of the movement so far
Entelo42Qureos541.4 weighted points to Qureos
- 3
Customer Documentation
8% weight87% of the movement so far
Entelo40Qureos521.0 weighted points to Qureos
- 4
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight97% of the movement so far
Entelo30Qureos280.4 weighted points to Entelo
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Entelo45Qureos440.1 weighted points to Entelo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Entelo minus Qureos, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Entelo | 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% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 54 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 33F | 33F | - | -0.4 |
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 | Entelo | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | — | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Entelo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 8 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 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Entelo, across 3 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Entelo last reviewed
- June 7, 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.