HomeCompareHighMatch vs softgarden

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

HighMatch vs softgarden

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

1 point separates HighMatch and softgarden.

HighMatch holds a 1-point edge over softgarden under rubric v1.0, 43 to 42, across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. The 7 criteria split 3 to 2 in favour of HighMatch, with 2 level: HighMatch 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 — HighMatch 30, softgarden 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 63% of the weighted advantage HighMatch holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

HighMatch 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 HighMatch is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordHighMatchsoftgarden
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSDE
Founded20052001

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 47% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    HighMatch 30 · softgarden 22

    1.4 weighted points to HighMatch

  2. 20% weight · 67% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    HighMatch 45 · softgarden 42

    0.6 weighted points to HighMatch

  3. 12% weight · 82% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    HighMatch 40 · softgarden 44

    0.5 weighted points to softgarden

  4. 15% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    HighMatch 52 · softgarden 54

    0.3 weighted points to softgarden

  5. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    HighMatch 60 · softgarden 58

    0.2 weighted points to HighMatch

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +1.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.1 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 +1.5.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is HighMatch minus softgarden.

CategoryWeightHighMatchsoftgardenΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4542+3+0.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%3022+8+1.4
FRIA Support15%3030--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5254-2-0.3
Human Oversight Design12%6058+2+0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%4044-4-0.5
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%43 (F)42 (F)+1+1.5

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHighMatchsoftgarden
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%60Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%41Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%50Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain70Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%314Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain315Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

HighMatch has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 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; some documentation or audit rows for HighMatch 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 HighMatch, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
HighMatch 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.