§ The result
Jobma leads Paradox by 8 points.
Jobma scores 49 and Paradox 41 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Video interview and Scheduling cohorts. Jobma leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Paradox leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (Jobma 62, Paradox 45) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Jobma 55, Paradox 40), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Jobma holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Jobma
AI video interviewing platform offering one-way (pre-recorded), live, and agentic AI interviews with automated transcription and AI scoring of candidate video, audio, and written responses as recruiter decision-support.
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
Jobma 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 Jobma is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Jobma | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jobma 55 · Paradox 40
3.0 weighted points to Jobma
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jobma 40 · Paradox 50
1.8 weighted points to Paradox
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jobma 56 · Paradox 45
1.6 weighted points to Jobma
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jobma 35 · Paradox 25
1.5 weighted points to Jobma
8% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jobma 62 · Paradox 45
1.4 weighted points to Jobma
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jobma 60 · Paradox 50
1.2 weighted points to Jobma
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jobma 44 · Paradox 35
1.1 weighted points to Jobma
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jobma minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Jobma | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 45 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 35 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 41 (F) | +8 | +8.0 |
§ 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 | Jobma | 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% | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 17 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Jobma has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 4 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 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 21 for Jobma, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jobma 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