§ The result
4 points separate Qureos and JobDiva.
Qureos holds a 4-point edge over JobDiva under rubric v1.0, 33 to 29, across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Qureos, with 1 level: Qureos is ahead on Human Oversight Design and JobDiva on Bias Audit Transparency. The advantage Qureos holds is spread out: Human Oversight Design is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (JobDiva 40, Qureos 54, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 38% of the weighted points Qureos gains across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
JobDiva
JobDiva is an all-in-one ATS, CRM, onboarding, back-office and VMS-synchronization platform for staffing agencies, with AI features including DivaMatch candidate-to-job scoring, AI-enhanced matching and semantic search, resume harvesting and generative outreach.
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
JobDiva is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Qureos is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | JobDiva | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 2003 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
JobDiva 40 · Qureos 54
1.7 weighted points to Qureos
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
JobDiva 38 · Qureos 44
0.9 weighted points to Qureos
8% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
JobDiva 42 · Qureos 52
0.8 weighted points to Qureos
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
JobDiva 30 · Qureos 35
0.6 weighted points to Qureos
18% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
JobDiva 15 · Qureos 12
0.5 weighted points to JobDiva
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
JobDiva 22 · Qureos 25
0.4 weighted points to Qureos
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is JobDiva minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | JobDiva | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 15 | 12 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 44 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 40 | 54 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 29 (F) | 33 (F) | -4 | -3.9 |
§ 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 | JobDiva | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 2 | — | 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% | 4 | 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% | 2 | 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% | 20 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
JobDiva has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 8 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 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for JobDiva, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- JobDiva 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