§ The result
Oleeo leads Qureos by 7 points.
Oleeo scores 40 and Qureos 33 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Oleeo, with 1 level: Oleeo is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Qureos on Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Oleeo 40, Qureos 12) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 63% of the weighted advantage Oleeo holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
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
Oleeo 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 | Oleeo | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | AE |
| Founded | 1995 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Oleeo 40 · Qureos 12
5.0 weighted points to Oleeo
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Oleeo 40 · Qureos 28
2.4 weighted points to Oleeo
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Oleeo 30 · Qureos 35
0.6 weighted points to Qureos
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Oleeo 55 · Qureos 52
0.2 weighted points to Oleeo
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Oleeo 45 · Qureos 44
0.1 weighted points to Oleeo
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Oleeo 55 · Qureos 54
0.1 weighted points to Oleeo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +7.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +7.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Oleeo minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Oleeo | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 28 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 12 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 33 (F) | +7 | +7.4 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | 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% | 0 | 1 | — | 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% | 2 | 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% | 10 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 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 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Oleeo 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