§ The result
Harver leads Qureos by 23 points.
Harver finishes 23 points clear of Qureos under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 33 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Qureos takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Harver, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Harver 80, Qureos 12) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 51% of the weighted advantage Harver holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Harver
Pre-employment assessment suite covering cognitive ability, behavioral, and situational judgement, including the legacy Pymetrics games product.
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
Harver is filed under Assessment AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Harver | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | NL | AE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Harver 80 · Qureos 12
12.2 weighted points to Harver
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harver 65 · Qureos 28
7.4 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harver 55 · Qureos 44
1.6 weighted points to Harver
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harver 35 · Qureos 25
1.5 weighted points to Harver
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harver 60 · Qureos 52
0.6 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harver 40 · Qureos 35
0.6 weighted points to Harver
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harver 50 · Qureos 54
0.5 weighted points to Qureos
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +23.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +23 beside that +23.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harver minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Harver | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 28 | +37 | +7.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 80 | 12 | +68 | +12.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 44 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 33 (F) | +23 | +23.6 |
§ 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 | Harver | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Harver has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 0 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 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Harver, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harver last reviewed
- May 21, 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