§ The result
Fountain leads Qureos on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Fountain sits 11 points above Qureos under rubric v1.0, 44 against 33, with both filed under Screening. Fountain leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Qureos is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Fountain leads is Human Oversight Design, Fountain 58 to Qureos 54. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Fountain 50, Qureos 28) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 40% of the weighted advantage Fountain holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Fountain
AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
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
Fountain and Qureos are both filed 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 | Fountain | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 2014 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Qureos 28
4.4 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Qureos 12
3.2 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Qureos 44
1.6 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Qureos 25
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Qureos 35
0.6 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Qureos 54
0.5 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +11.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +11.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 28 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 12 | +18 | +3.2 |
| 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% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 33 (F) | +11 | +11.1 |
§ 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 | Fountain | 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain 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.
§ Where next