§ The result
TestGorilla leads Paradox by 6 points.
TestGorilla scores 47 and Paradox 41 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Scheduling cohorts. TestGorilla 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 (Paradox 45, TestGorilla 58) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Paradox 40, TestGorilla 52), the second being 32% of the weighted advantage TestGorilla holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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
TestGorilla
TestGorilla is a pre-employment skills-assessment platform offering a large test library plus AI features for resume scoring, candidate sourcing, and one-way/conversational AI video interviews to support skills-based hiring.
§ The record
Paradox is filed under Scheduling AI, TestGorilla under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only TestGorilla is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Paradox | TestGorilla |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2016 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Paradox 40 · TestGorilla 52
2.4 weighted points to TestGorilla
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Paradox 50 · TestGorilla 38
2.2 weighted points to Paradox
15% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Paradox 45 · TestGorilla 56
1.6 weighted points to TestGorilla
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Paradox 50 · TestGorilla 60
1.2 weighted points to TestGorilla
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Paradox 45 · TestGorilla 58
1.0 weighted points to TestGorilla
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Paradox 25 · TestGorilla 30
0.8 weighted points to TestGorilla
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Paradox 35 · TestGorilla 38
0.4 weighted points to TestGorilla
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Paradox minus TestGorilla.
| Category | Weight | Paradox | TestGorilla | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 56 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 47 (F) | -6 | -5.2 |
§ 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 | TestGorilla | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 14 | 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; TestGorilla has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Paradox and TestGorilla sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 29 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for TestGorilla, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Paradox last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TestGorilla last reviewed
- June 7, 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