§ The result
Paradox leads HireLogic by 7 points.
Paradox scores 41 and HireLogic 34 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Scheduling and Video interview cohorts. HireLogic takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 3 for Paradox, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 3 are level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HireLogic 15, Paradox 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 85% of the weighted advantage Paradox holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
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
HireLogic is filed under Video interview AI, Paradox under Scheduling AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only HireLogic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HireLogic | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HireLogic 15 · Paradox 50
6.3 weighted points to Paradox
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HireLogic 28 · Paradox 35
0.8 weighted points to Paradox
20% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HireLogic 42 · Paradox 40
0.4 weighted points to HireLogic
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HireLogic 48 · Paradox 50
0.2 weighted points to Paradox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to -7.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HireLogic minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | HireLogic | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 15 | 50 | -35 | -6.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 45 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 50 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 45 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 34 (F) | 41 (F) | -7 | -7.0 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | Paradox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 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 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HireLogic 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