§ The result
2 points separate Wonderlic and Paradox.
Wonderlic (Assessment) edges Paradox (Scheduling) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 43 to 41. Paradox and Wonderlic each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Wonderlic holds (headed by Article 11 Technical Documentation) adds up to more weighted points. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Paradox 40, Wonderlic 52 — and at a 20% weight it carries 70% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 3 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
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
§ The record
Paradox is filed under Scheduling AI, Wonderlic 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 Wonderlic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Paradox | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Paradox 40 · Wonderlic 52
2.4 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Paradox 45 · Wonderlic 38
1.1 weighted points to Paradox
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Paradox 45 · Wonderlic 55
0.8 weighted points to Wonderlic
18% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Paradox 50 · Wonderlic 48
0.4 weighted points to Paradox
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Paradox 50 · Wonderlic 52
0.2 weighted points to Wonderlic
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Paradox 35 · Wonderlic 33
0.2 weighted points to Paradox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -1.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Paradox minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Paradox | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 43 (F) | -2 | -1.8 |
§ 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 | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | 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 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 9 | 6 | 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; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 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 25 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Paradox, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Paradox last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic 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