§ The result
Testlify leads Qureos on all 7 criteria.
Testlify sits 12 points above Qureos under rubric v1.0 — 45 against 33 — with Testlify filed under Assessment and Qureos under Screening. Of the 7 criteria Qureos wins none, and the narrowest lead Testlify holds is on Human Oversight Design, Qureos 54 to Testlify 55. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Qureos 28, Testlify 52, 20% weight), is only 38% of the weighted advantage Testlify builds 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
Testlify
Testlify is a skills-assessment and AI-interviewing platform that ranks candidates on a scored leaderboard from pre-built or AI-generated tests, with an AI résumé screener, AI-scored video, voice and chat interviews, and AI-assisted proctoring.
§ The record
Qureos is filed under Screening AI, Testlify under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Qureos | Testlify |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | AE | US |
| Founded | 2021 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Qureos 28 · Testlify 52
4.8 weighted points to Testlify
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Qureos 12 · Testlify 30
3.2 weighted points to Testlify
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Qureos 44 · Testlify 55
1.6 weighted points to Testlify
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Qureos 25 · Testlify 33
1.2 weighted points to Testlify
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Qureos 35 · Testlify 42
0.8 weighted points to Testlify
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Qureos 52 · Testlify 60
0.6 weighted points to Testlify
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Qureos 54 · Testlify 55
0.1 weighted points to Testlify
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Qureos minus Testlify.
| Category | Weight | Qureos | Testlify | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 52 | -24 | -4.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 30 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 33 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 45 (F) | -12 | -12.5 |
§ 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 | Qureos | Testlify | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Qureos has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Testlify has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for Testlify, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Qureos last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Testlify 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