§ The result
Glider AI leads Paradox on all 7 criteria.
Glider AI sits 11 points above Paradox under rubric v1.0 — 52 against 41 — with Glider AI filed under Assessment and Paradox under Scheduling. Glider AI is ahead of Paradox on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at Glider AI 55 to Paradox 50. The advantage Glider AI holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Glider AI 68, Paradox 50, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 30% of the weighted points Glider AI gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
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
Glider AI is filed under Assessment AI, Paradox under Scheduling AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Glider AI | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2020 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Glider AI 68 · Paradox 50
3.2 weighted points to Glider AI
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Glider AI 52 · Paradox 40
2.4 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Glider AI 35 · Paradox 25
1.5 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Glider AI 54 · Paradox 45
1.3 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Glider AI 60 · Paradox 45
1.2 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Glider AI 55 · Paradox 50
0.6 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Glider AI 40 · Paradox 35
0.6 weighted points to Glider AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +10.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Glider AI minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Glider AI | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 50 | +18 | +3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 45 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 41 (F) | +11 | +10.9 |
§ 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 | Glider AI | Paradox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 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% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 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 Glider AI and Paradox sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Glider AI 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