§ The result
1 point separates Tengai and Paradox.
Tengai (Screening) edges Paradox (Scheduling) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 42 to 41. Paradox takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Tengai, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing are the same criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, and Paradox holds it (Paradox 50, Tengai 33, 18% weight), worth 93% of the weighted advantage Paradox builds across the 2 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Paradox
Conversational AI ("Olivia") that screens, schedules, and engages candidates over chat and SMS, often deployed on top of an existing ATS.
Vendor profile
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
Paradox is filed under Scheduling AI, Tengai under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Tengai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Paradox | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Paradox 50 · Tengai 33
3.1 weighted points to Paradox
20% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Paradox 40 · Tengai 45
1.0 weighted points to Tengai
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Paradox 50 · Tengai 58
1.0 weighted points to Tengai
8% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Paradox 45 · Tengai 55
0.8 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Paradox 45 · Tengai 50
0.8 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Paradox 25 · Tengai 28
0.4 weighted points to Tengai
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Paradox 35 · Tengai 33
0.2 weighted points to Paradox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Paradox minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | Paradox | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 33 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 42 (F) | -1 | -0.7 |
§ 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 | Paradox | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 37 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Paradox has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Paradox and Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Paradox last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai last reviewed
- September 25, 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