HomeCompareHireQuotient vs softgarden

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

HireQuotient vs softgarden

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

softgarden leads HireQuotient on all 7 criteria.

Under rubric v1.0, softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 42 and HireQuotient, filed under Sourcing, on 34, 8 points apart. softgarden takes all 7 criteria from HireQuotient without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Human Oversight Design, HireQuotient 57 to softgarden 58. Even Data Governance Disclosure, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (HireQuotient 40, softgarden 54, 15% weight), is only 27% of the weighted advantage softgarden builds across the 7 criteria it leads.

§ The record

HireQuotient 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. Only HireQuotient is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordHireQuotientsoftgarden
Price tierLowMid
HeadquartersSGDE
Founded20212001

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 15% weight · 27% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    HireQuotient 40 · softgarden 54

    2.1 weighted points to softgarden

  2. 12% weight · 48% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    HireQuotient 30 · softgarden 44

    1.7 weighted points to softgarden

  3. 20% weight · 66% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    HireQuotient 35 · softgarden 42

    1.4 weighted points to softgarden

  4. 15% weight · 81% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    HireQuotient 22 · softgarden 30

    1.2 weighted points to softgarden

  5. 18% weight · 90% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    HireQuotient 18 · softgarden 22

    0.7 weighted points to softgarden

  6. 8% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    HireQuotient 50 · softgarden 58

    0.6 weighted points to softgarden

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    HireQuotient 57 · softgarden 58

    0.1 weighted points to softgarden

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.9.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is HireQuotient minus softgarden.

CategoryWeightHireQuotientsoftgardenΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3542-7-1.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%1822-4-0.7
FRIA Support15%2230-8-1.2
Data Governance Disclosure15%4054-14-2.1
Human Oversight Design12%5758-1-0.1
Post-Market Monitoring12%3044-14-1.7
Customer Documentation8%5058-8-0.6
Total100%34 (F)42 (F)-8-7.9

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHireQuotientsoftgarden
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%60Sources 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%31Sources on the vendor's own domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%245Sources on the vendor's own domain315Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 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 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
HireQuotient 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.