§ The result
Workstream leads Qureos on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Inside the Screening cohort, rubric v1.0 puts Workstream on 39 and Qureos on 33, 6 points apart. Qureos is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Workstream takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is FRIA Support, Qureos 25 to Workstream 27. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Qureos 28, Workstream 40 — and at a 20% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Workstream holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
Qureos and Workstream are both filed under Screening 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 | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AE | US |
| Founded | 2021 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Qureos 28 · Workstream 40
2.4 weighted points to Workstream
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Qureos 12 · Workstream 20
1.4 weighted points to Workstream
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Qureos 54 · Workstream 61
0.8 weighted points to Workstream
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Qureos 44 · Workstream 47
0.4 weighted points to Workstream
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Qureos 52 · Workstream 56
0.3 weighted points to Workstream
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Qureos 25 · Workstream 27
0.3 weighted points to Workstream
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Qureos minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Qureos | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 20 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 47 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 61 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 56 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 39 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Sources 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; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Qureos, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Qureos last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream 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