HomeCompareHogan Assessments vs Qureos

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Hogan Assessments vs Qureos

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Hogan Assessments leads Qureos by 14 points.

Hogan Assessments, filed under Assessment, comes out 14 points above Qureos, filed under Screening: 47 against 33 under rubric v1.0. Qureos takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Hogan Assessments, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Hogan Assessments 44, Qureos 12 — and at an 18% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Hogan Assessments holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Hogan Assessments 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.

RecordHogan AssessmentsQureos
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSAE
Founded19872021

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 39% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Hogan Assessments 44 · Qureos 12

    5.8 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  2. 20% weight · 69% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Hogan Assessments 50 · Qureos 28

    4.4 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  3. 15% weight · 81% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Hogan Assessments 36 · Qureos 25

    1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  4. 15% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Hogan Assessments 52 · Qureos 44

    1.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  5. 8% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Hogan Assessments 62 · Qureos 52

    0.8 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  6. 12% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Hogan Assessments 40 · Qureos 35

    0.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Hogan Assessments 52 · Qureos 54

    0.2 weighted points to Qureos

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +14.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Hogan Assessments minus Qureos.

CategoryWeightHogan AssessmentsQureosΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5028+22+4.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%4412+32+5.8
FRIA Support15%3625+11+1.6
Data Governance Disclosure15%5244+8+1.2
Human Oversight Design12%5254-2-0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%4035+5+0.6
Customer Documentation8%6252+10+0.8
Total100%47 (F)33 (F)+14+14.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHogan AssessmentsQureos
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%31Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%40Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%206Sources on the vendor's own domain287Sources on the vendor's own domain

Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 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 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Hogan Assessments last reviewed
July 17, 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.