§ The result
Criteria leads softgarden by 11 points.
Criteria, filed under Assessment, comes out 11 points above softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated: 53 against 42 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Criteria: Criteria is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and softgarden on Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Criteria 68, softgarden 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 45% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
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
Criteria 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 Criteria is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Criteria | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2006 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · softgarden 42
5.2 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · softgarden 22
4.7 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · softgarden 54
1.2 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · softgarden 30
0.3 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · softgarden 44
0.2 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +11.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 42 | +26 | +5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 22 | +26 | +4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 44 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 42 (F) | +11 | +11.1 |
§ 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 | Criteria | 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% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 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 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria 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.
§ Where next