HomeCompareBullhorn vs softgarden

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Bullhorn vs softgarden

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Bullhorn leads softgarden by 12 points.

Bullhorn sits 12 points above softgarden under rubric v1.0, 54 against 42, with both filed under ATS-integrated. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Bullhorn: Bullhorn is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and softgarden on Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Bullhorn 58, softgarden 22) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 50% of the weighted advantage Bullhorn holds across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Bullhorn and softgarden are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.

RecordBullhornsoftgarden
Price tierHighMid
HeadquartersUSDE
Founded19992001

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 46% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Bullhorn 58 · softgarden 22

    6.5 weighted points to Bullhorn

  2. 20% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Bullhorn 62 · softgarden 42

    4.0 weighted points to Bullhorn

  3. 15% weight · 83% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Bullhorn 38 · softgarden 30

    1.2 weighted points to Bullhorn

  4. 12% weight · 91% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Bullhorn 35 · softgarden 44

    1.1 weighted points to softgarden

  5. 15% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Bullhorn 60 · softgarden 54

    0.9 weighted points to Bullhorn

  6. 12% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Bullhorn 60 · softgarden 58

    0.2 weighted points to Bullhorn

  7. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Bullhorn 60 · softgarden 58

    0.2 weighted points to Bullhorn

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.9.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Bullhorn minus softgarden.

CategoryWeightBullhornsoftgardenΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%6242+20+4.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%5822+36+6.5
FRIA Support15%3830+8+1.2
Data Governance Disclosure15%6054+6+0.9
Human Oversight Design12%6058+2+0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%3544-9-1.1
Customer Documentation8%6058+2+0.2
Total100%54 (F)42 (F)+12+11.9

§ 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.

CriterionWeightBullhornsoftgarden
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11—31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%30Sources on the vendor's own domain70Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%11Sources on the vendor's own domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%156Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain315Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Bullhorn has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; softgarden has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Bullhorn, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Bullhorn last reviewed
June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
softgarden 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.