§ The result
Manatal leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
Manatal scores 41 and Qureos 33 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Manatal is ahead of Qureos on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Article 11 Technical Documentation at Manatal 33 to Qureos 28. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Manatal 22, Qureos 12, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 23% of the weighted advantage Manatal holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Manatal
Cloud-based applicant tracking system and recruitment CRM for agencies and HR teams, featuring an AI engine that scores and ranks candidates against job requirements and an asynchronous AI video Interviewer.
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
Manatal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Qureos under Screening AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Manatal | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | TH | AE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Manatal 22 · Qureos 12
1.8 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 39% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Manatal 33 · Qureos 25
1.2 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Manatal 52 · Qureos 44
1.2 weighted points to Manatal
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Manatal 33 · Qureos 28
1.0 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Manatal 43 · Qureos 35
1.0 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Manatal 62 · Qureos 52
0.8 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Manatal 60 · Qureos 54
0.7 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +7.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Manatal minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Manatal | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 28 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 12 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 25 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 44 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 43 | 35 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 33 (F) | +8 | +7.7 |
§ 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 | Manatal | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Manatal 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.
§ Where next