§ The result
1 point separates softgarden and Harri.
softgarden holds a 1-point edge over Harri under rubric v1.0, 42 to 41, with both scored in the ATS-integrated cohort. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of softgarden, with 1 level: softgarden is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Harri on FRIA Support. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing are the same criterion, FRIA Support, and Harri holds it (Harri 44, softgarden 30, 15% weight), worth 93% of the weighted advantage Harri builds across the 2 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Harri
Harri is a frontline workforce platform for hospitality, grocery and care employers whose pre-hire suite pairs a career portal and applicant tracking system with Carri, a conversational AI assistant that screens applicants and coordinates interviews, plus an agentic AI layer (Salli) for scheduling and labor-law compliance.
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
Harri and softgarden are both filed 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 | Harri | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 41% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Harri 44 · softgarden 30
2.1 weighted points to Harri
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Harri 35 · softgarden 42
1.4 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Harri 52 · softgarden 58
0.7 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Harri 40 · softgarden 44
0.5 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Harri 52 · softgarden 54
0.3 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Harri 60 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to Harri
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -0.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Harri minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Harri | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 22 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 44 | 30 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 44 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 42 (F) | -1 | -0.6 |
§ 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 | Harri | 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 | 2 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Harri has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 8 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 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Harri, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Harri last reviewed
- August 2, 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