§ The result
Paradox leads Turing by 5 points.
Paradox scores 41 and Turing 36 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Scheduling and Assessment cohorts. Paradox leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Turing leads 2, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Paradox 50, Turing 28 — and at an 18% weight it carries 70% of the weighted advantage Paradox holds across the 4 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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Paradox is filed under Scheduling AI, Turing under Assessment 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 Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Paradox | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Paradox 50 · Turing 28
4.0 weighted points to Paradox
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Paradox 35 · Turing 27
1.0 weighted points to Paradox
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Paradox 50 · Turing 45
0.6 weighted points to Paradox
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Paradox 40 · Turing 42
0.4 weighted points to Turing
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Paradox 45 · Turing 48
0.2 weighted points to Turing
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Paradox 45 · Turing 44
0.1 weighted points to Paradox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Paradox minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Paradox | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 28 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 36 (F) | +5 | +5.0 |
§ 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 | Paradox | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Paradox has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 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 24 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Paradox last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 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