§ The result
Findem leads softgarden by 16 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Findem (Sourcing) opens a 16-point lead on softgarden (ATS-integrated), 58 to 42. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Findem, with 1 level: Findem is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and softgarden on Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Findem 83, softgarden 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
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
Findem is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, softgarden 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.
| Record | Findem | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Findem 83 · softgarden 22
11.0 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Findem 58 · softgarden 42
3.2 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Findem 38 · softgarden 30
1.2 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Findem 57 · softgarden 54
0.4 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Findem 60 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Findem 42 · softgarden 44
0.2 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +15.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +15.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Findem minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Findem | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 22 | +61 | +11.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 54 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 44 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 42 (F) | +16 | +15.8 |
§ 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 | Findem | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Findem 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