§ The result
Pinpoint leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Pinpoint (ATS-integrated) opens a 24-point lead on Qureos (Screening), 57 to 33. Qureos leads none of the 7 criteria, and Pinpoint is ahead on 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Pinpoint 72, Qureos 28, 20% weight), is only 36% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
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
Pinpoint 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, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Qureos is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pinpoint | Qureos |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | JE | AE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2021 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pinpoint 72 · Qureos 28
8.8 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pinpoint 42 · Qureos 12
5.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pinpoint 68 · Qureos 44
3.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pinpoint 52 · Qureos 35
2.0 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pinpoint 38 · Qureos 25
1.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pinpoint 64 · Qureos 54
1.2 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pinpoint 66 · Qureos 52
1.1 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +24.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +24 beside that +24.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pinpoint minus Qureos.
| Category | Weight | Pinpoint | Qureos | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 28 | +44 | +8.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 12 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 25 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 68 | 44 | +24 | +3.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 54 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 52 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 33 (F) | +24 | +24.1 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | Qureos | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pinpoint 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