§ The result
Greenhouse leads Paradox on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 26 points between Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Paradox (Scheduling): 67 (D) for Greenhouse, 41 (F) for Paradox. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Paradox leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Greenhouse 78, Paradox 40, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 30% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
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
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Paradox under Scheduling AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Greenhouse | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · Paradox 40
7.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · Paradox 50
6.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · Paradox 45
2.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · Paradox 35
2.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · Paradox 25
2.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · Paradox 50
1.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · Paradox 45
1.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +25.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +26 beside that +25.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 40 | +38 | +7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 50 | +36 | +6.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 45 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 50 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 35 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 45 | +19 | +1.5 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 41 (F) | +26 | +25.7 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | Paradox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 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% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | 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 |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Paradox has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and Paradox sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 27 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 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