§ The result
impress.ai leads Qureos by 5 points.
impress.ai finishes 5 points ahead of Qureos under rubric v1.0, 38 to 33, both scored as Screening entries. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of impress.ai, with 1 level: impress.ai is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Qureos on Post-Market Monitoring. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap (impress.ai 55, Qureos 44) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (impress.ai 22, Qureos 12), 34% of the weighted advantage impress.ai builds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
impress.ai
impress.ai is a Singapore-headquartered recruitment automation platform that uses conversational AI assistants, resume parsing and scoring, and structured competency-based screening to filter, rank and shortlist job candidates, integrating with enterprise ATS systems.
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
impress.ai and Qureos are both filed under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | impress.ai | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | AE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Qureos 12
1.8 weighted points to impress.ai
15% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Qureos 44
1.6 weighted points to impress.ai
20% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · Qureos 28
1.4 weighted points to impress.ai
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · Qureos 52
0.5 weighted points to impress.ai
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · Qureos 35
0.4 weighted points to Qureos
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Qureos 54
0.2 weighted points to Qureos
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +4.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 12 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 44 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 33 (F) | +5 | +4.7 |
§ 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 | impress.ai | 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 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 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 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