§ The result
Paradox takes the total, Fetcher takes more of the criteria.
Paradox (Scheduling) edges Fetcher (Sourcing) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 41 to 37. Fetcher leads more of the criteria than Paradox — 3 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Paradox leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Paradox. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Fetcher 28, Paradox 50 — and at an 18% weight it carries 60% of the weighted advantage Paradox holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Fetcher
AI-powered candidate sourcing and outbound recruiting platform that automates passive and active talent sourcing, personalized email outreach, and inbound applicant screening for corporate recruiting teams.
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
Fetcher is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Paradox under Scheduling AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Fetcher | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fetcher 28 · Paradox 50
4.0 weighted points to Paradox
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fetcher 27 · Paradox 40
2.6 weighted points to Paradox
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fetcher 55 · Paradox 45
1.5 weighted points to Fetcher
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fetcher 55 · Paradox 45
0.8 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fetcher 52 · Paradox 50
0.2 weighted points to Fetcher
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fetcher minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Fetcher | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 27 | 40 | -13 | -2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 50 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 41 (F) | -4 | -4.0 |
§ 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 | Fetcher | Paradox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Fetcher has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 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 Paradox sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 29 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Fetcher, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fetcher last reviewed
- July 17, 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