§ The result
Interviewer.AI leads Qureos by 14 points.
Interviewer.AI, filed under Video interview, comes out 14 points above Qureos, filed under Screening: 47 against 33 under rubric v1.0. Interviewer.AI leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Qureos leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Interviewer.AI 52, Qureos 28, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Interviewer.AI holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
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
Interviewer.AI is filed under Video interview AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| Record | Interviewer.AI | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | AE |
| Founded | 2018 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Interviewer.AI 52 · Qureos 28
4.8 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
18% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Interviewer.AI 35 · Qureos 12
4.1 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Interviewer.AI 60 · Qureos 44
2.4 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Interviewer.AI 35 · Qureos 25
1.5 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Interviewer.AI 60 · Qureos 54
0.7 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Interviewer.AI 58 · Qureos 52
0.5 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Interviewer.AI 32 · Qureos 35
0.4 weighted points to Qureos
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +13.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.4 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 +13.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Interviewer.AI minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Interviewer.AI | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 28 | +24 | +4.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 12 | +23 | +4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 44 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 33 (F) | +14 | +13.7 |
§ 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 | Interviewer.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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 1 | 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% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Interviewer.AI 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