§ The result
2 points separate softgarden and Feenyx.
softgarden holds a 2-point edge over Feenyx under rubric v1.0, 42 to 40, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Feenyx takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 4 for softgarden, whose share includes FRIA Support, and 2 are level. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Feenyx 38, softgarden 44) and FRIA Support at 15% (Feenyx 25, softgarden 30), the second being 32% of the weighted advantage softgarden holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Feenyx
Feenyx (formerly Filtered.ai) is a skills-assessment and interview platform that runs AI-scored asynchronous coding, video and written assessments and AI-assisted live interviews, with resume scoring, candidate matching, identity verification and fraud/AI-use detection.
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
Feenyx 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, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Feenyx is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Feenyx | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 26% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Feenyx 25 · softgarden 30
0.8 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Feenyx 38 · softgarden 44
0.7 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Feenyx 50 · softgarden 54
0.6 weighted points to softgarden
18% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Feenyx 25 · softgarden 22
0.5 weighted points to Feenyx
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Feenyx 55 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -1.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.9 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 Feenyx minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Feenyx | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 22 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 44 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 42 (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 | Feenyx | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 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% | 8 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 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 Feenyx sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Feenyx 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