§ The result
softgarden leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
softgarden sits 12 points above Cognisess under rubric v1.0 — 42 against 30 — with softgarden filed under ATS-integrated and Cognisess under Assessment. softgarden is ahead of Cognisess on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Cognisess 20 to softgarden 22. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Cognisess 40, softgarden 58) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cognisess 25, softgarden 42), 29% of the weighted advantage softgarden builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
Vendor profile
softgarden
softgarden is a German cloud applicant tracking system (multiposting, career sites, applicant management and onboarding) with optional AI features: AI-Assisted Applicant Matching, which highlights applicants who closely match a job's requirements, and a newer LLM-based Screening Assistant, which scores each applicant against screening criteria.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, softgarden under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Cognisess is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | DE |
| Founded | 2011 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · softgarden 42
3.4 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · softgarden 58
1.9 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · softgarden 54
1.8 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · softgarden 30
1.5 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · softgarden 44
1.4 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · softgarden 58
1.4 weighted points to softgarden
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · softgarden 22
0.4 weighted points to softgarden
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 11.9 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 Cognisess minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 54 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 58 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 44 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (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.
| Criterion | Weight | Cognisess | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; softgarden has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 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.
§ Where next