Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
hackajob vs Qureos
hackajob
Archer, hackajob's AI sourcing agent, is calibrated by a recruiter on a hiring brief, then finds, engages and qualifies passive candidates from a 1.5m-member pool and 800m+ indexed profiles and invites those who meet the bar to apply through the employer's existing ATS.
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
hackajob leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
hackajob, filed under Sourcing, comes out 12 points above Qureos, filed under Screening: 45 against 33 under rubric v1.0. hackajob takes all 7 criteria and Qureos none of them; the nearest contest is Human Oversight Design, hackajob 55 to Qureos 54. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — hackajob 60, Qureos 28 — and at a 20% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage hackajob holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- hackajob7
- Qureos0
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation60 vs 28
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
hackajob 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 | hackajob | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | AE |
| Founded | 2014 | 2021 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight53% of the movement so far
hackajob60Qureos286.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight70% of the movement so far
hackajob58Qureos442.1 weighted points to hackajob
- 3
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight82% of the movement so far
hackajob20Qureos121.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
hackajob32Qureos251.1 weighted points to hackajob
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight96% of the movement so far
hackajob60Qureos520.6 weighted points to hackajob
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight99% of the movement so far
hackajob38Qureos350.4 weighted points to hackajob
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
hackajob55Qureos540.1 weighted points to hackajob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.1 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 +12.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is hackajob minus Qureos, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | hackajob | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 28 | +32 | +6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 12 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 44 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 45F | 33F | +12 | +12.1 |
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 | hackajob | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 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% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 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% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
hackajob has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 4 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 77 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 42 for hackajob, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- hackajob 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.