§ The result
Paradox leads Intervue.io by 10 points.
Paradox sits 10 points above Intervue.io under rubric v1.0 — 41 against 31 — with Paradox filed under Scheduling and Intervue.io under Video interview. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Paradox: Paradox is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Intervue.io on Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Intervue.io 12, Paradox 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 60% of the weighted advantage Paradox holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
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
Intervue.io 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 Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Intervue.io | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2020 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Intervue.io 12 · Paradox 50
6.8 weighted points to Paradox
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Intervue.io 28 · Paradox 40
2.4 weighted points to Paradox
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Intervue.io 38 · Paradox 45
1.1 weighted points to Paradox
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Intervue.io 30 · Paradox 35
0.6 weighted points to Paradox
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Intervue.io 54 · Paradox 50
0.5 weighted points to Intervue.io
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Intervue.io 22 · Paradox 25
0.4 weighted points to Paradox
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Intervue.io 50 · Paradox 45
0.4 weighted points to Intervue.io
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Intervue.io minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Intervue.io | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 50 | -38 | -6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 50 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 31 (F) | 41 (F) | -10 | -10.5 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | 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% | 5 | 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% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 7 | 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 |
Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 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 Intervue.io and Paradox sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Intervue.io 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