Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
HackerEarth vs softgarden
HackerEarth
HackerEarth is a technical-hiring platform that auto-scores coding assessments under AI proctoring, runs FaceCode live coding interviews with AI-generated summaries, and offers OnScreen, an AI video-avatar interviewer that scores candidates against a fixed rubric.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
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.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
HackerEarth takes the total, softgarden takes more of the criteria.
HackerEarth (Assessment) edges softgarden (ATS-integrated) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42. softgarden leads more of the criteria than HackerEarth — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which HackerEarth leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to HackerEarth. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (HackerEarth 55, softgarden 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 50% of the weighted advantage HackerEarth holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- HackerEarth3
- softgarden4
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation55 vs 42
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
HackerEarth is filed under Assessment AI, softgarden under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only HackerEarth is in scope of
| Record | HackerEarth | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2001 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight43% of the movement so far
HackerEarth55softgarden422.6 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight81% of the movement so far
HackerEarth35softgarden222.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight86% of the movement so far
HackerEarth32softgarden300.3 weighted points to HackerEarth
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight91% of the movement so far
HackerEarth52softgarden540.3 weighted points to softgarden
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
HackerEarth56softgarden580.2 weighted points to softgarden
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight99% of the movement so far
HackerEarth42softgarden440.2 weighted points to softgarden
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
HackerEarth57softgarden580.1 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HackerEarth minus softgarden, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | HackerEarth | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 44 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 42F | +4 | +4.4 |
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 | HackerEarth | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 75 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HackerEarth 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.