§ The result
Sense leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Sense scores 58 to 33 for Qureos, a 25-point gap between two Screening entries. Of the 7 criteria Qureos wins none, and the narrowest lead Sense holds is on Human Oversight Design, Qureos 54 to Sense 64. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Qureos 12, Sense 72) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage Sense holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
§ The record
Qureos and Sense are both filed 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 | Qureos | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AE | US |
| Founded | 2021 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Qureos 12 · Sense 72
10.8 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Qureos 28 · Sense 60
6.4 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Qureos 44 · Sense 58
2.1 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Qureos 35 · Sense 52
2.0 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Qureos 25 · Sense 38
1.9 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Qureos 54 · Sense 64
1.2 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Qureos 52 · Sense 62
0.8 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -25.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -25 beside that -25.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Qureos minus Sense.
| Category | Weight | Qureos | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 60 | -32 | -6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 72 | -60 | -10.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 58 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 64 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 52 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 58 (F) | -25 | -25.3 |
§ 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 | Qureos | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Qureos has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Qureos last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sense last reviewed
- June 7, 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