§ The result
Crosschq leads Paradox by 6 points.
Crosschq scores 47 and Paradox 41 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Screening and Scheduling cohorts. Paradox takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Crosschq, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Paradox takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Crosschq 38, Paradox 50), 100% of the weighted advantage it builds, while the widest raw gap is on Customer Documentation, Crosschq 62 to Paradox 45.
Vendor profile
Crosschq
Crosschq is a hiring-intelligence platform that combines automated 360 reference checks, an AI Interview Agent that conducts and scores voice/video screening interviews, AI resume matching and ranking, candidate-fraud and identity checks, Traitify personality and cognitive assessments, and quality-of-hire analytics.
Vendor profile
Paradox
Conversational AI ("Olivia") that screens, schedules, and engages candidates over chat and SMS, often deployed on top of an existing ATS.
§ The record
Crosschq is filed under Screening AI, Paradox under Scheduling AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Crosschq is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Crosschq | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 21% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Crosschq 38 · Paradox 50
2.2 weighted points to Paradox
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Crosschq 50 · Paradox 40
2.0 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Crosschq 58 · Paradox 45
1.9 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Crosschq 62 · Paradox 50
1.4 weighted points to Crosschq
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Crosschq 62 · Paradox 45
1.4 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Crosschq 30 · Paradox 25
0.8 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Crosschq 40 · Paradox 35
0.6 weighted points to Crosschq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.3 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 +5.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Crosschq minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Crosschq | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 41 (F) | +6 | +5.9 |
§ 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 | Crosschq | Paradox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Paradox has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Crosschq and Paradox sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Crosschq last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paradox last reviewed
- May 21, 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