§ The result
Phenom leads Qureos by 19 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Phenom (Sourcing) opens a 19-point lead on Qureos (Screening), 52 to 33. Qureos takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Post-Market Monitoring among them, against 5 for Phenom, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Phenom 75, Qureos 12 — and at an 18% weight it carries 56% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
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
Phenom is filed under Candidate sourcing 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 | Phenom | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AE |
| Founded | 2010 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Phenom 75 · Qureos 12
11.3 weighted points to Phenom
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Phenom 55 · Qureos 28
5.4 weighted points to Phenom
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Phenom 60 · Qureos 44
2.4 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Phenom 60 · Qureos 54
0.7 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Phenom 30 · Qureos 35
0.6 weighted points to Qureos
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Phenom 55 · Qureos 52
0.2 weighted points to Phenom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +19.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +19 beside that +19.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Phenom minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Phenom | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 28 | +27 | +5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 75 | 12 | +63 | +11.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 44 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 33 (F) | +19 | +19.5 |
§ 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 | Phenom | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 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 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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