§ The result
isolved leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
isolved sits 14 points above Qureos under rubric v1.0 — 47 against 33 — with isolved filed under ATS-integrated and Qureos under Screening. Of the 7 criteria Qureos wins none, and the narrowest lead isolved holds is on Human Oversight Design, isolved 55 to Qureos 54. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (isolved 45, Qureos 12) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage isolved holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
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
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Qureos is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | isolved | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 1986 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Qureos 12
5.9 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Qureos 28
4.4 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Qureos 35
1.4 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · Qureos 44
1.3 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · Qureos 25
0.8 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Qureos 52
0.3 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
isolved 55 · Qureos 54
0.1 weighted points to isolved
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.3 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 +14.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 28 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 12 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 44 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 35 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 33 (F) | +14 | +14.3 |
§ 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 | isolved | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Qureos has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved 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.
§ Where next