§ The result
HiPeople leads softgarden on all 7 criteria.
HiPeople finishes 19 points clear of softgarden under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 42 (F) — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Of the 7 criteria softgarden wins none, and the narrowest lead HiPeople holds is on Data Governance Disclosure, HiPeople 58 to softgarden 54. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (HiPeople 84, softgarden 22) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 57% of the weighted advantage HiPeople holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
HiPeople
HiPeople is a Berlin-based hiring platform combining a 400+ test skills and personality assessment library, automated AI reference checks, AI resume/application screening that scores candidates against job criteria, and AI screening calls.
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
HiPeople 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 HiPeople is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HiPeople | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | DE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiPeople 84 · softgarden 22
11.2 weighted points to HiPeople
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiPeople 62 · softgarden 42
4.0 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiPeople 60 · softgarden 44
1.9 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiPeople 35 · softgarden 30
0.8 weighted points to HiPeople
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiPeople 66 · softgarden 58
0.6 weighted points to HiPeople
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiPeople 58 · softgarden 54
0.6 weighted points to HiPeople
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiPeople 62 · softgarden 58
0.5 weighted points to HiPeople
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +19.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +19 beside that +19.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiPeople minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | HiPeople | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 42 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 84 | 22 | +62 | +11.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 44 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 42 (F) | +19 | +19.6 |
§ 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 | HiPeople | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
HiPeople has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 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; some documentation or audit rows for HiPeople sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for HiPeople, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiPeople 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