§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads Paradox on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) finishes 16 points clear of Paradox under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 41 — across the Sourcing and Scheduling cohorts. Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Paradox is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads is FRIA Support, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 to Paradox 25. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84, Paradox 50 — and at an 18% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is an AI talent-sourcing search engine that lets recruiters find, rank, and reach candidates across 800M+ public profiles using natural-language queries instead of Boolean search, with an "Autopilot" agent that scores and ranks profiles against job criteria.
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
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Paradox under Scheduling AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Paradox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 · Paradox 50
6.1 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
20% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 52 · Paradox 40
2.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55 · Paradox 35
2.4 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56 · Paradox 45
1.6 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35 · Paradox 25
1.5 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 60 · Paradox 45
1.2 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +15.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +15.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Juicebox (PeopleGPT) minus Paradox.
| Category | Weight | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Paradox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 50 | +34 | +6.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 45 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 35 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 41 (F) | +16 | +15.3 |
§ 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 | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Paradox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 4 | 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 |
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 Juicebox (PeopleGPT) and Paradox sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 26 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains, and 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 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