§ The result
iMocha leads softgarden on all 7 criteria.
iMocha, filed under Assessment, comes out 14 points above softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated: 56 against 42 under rubric v1.0. iMocha leads every one of the 7 criteria, softgarden none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, iMocha 48 to softgarden 44. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (iMocha 68, softgarden 42, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage iMocha holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
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
iMocha 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 iMocha is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | iMocha | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | DE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
iMocha 68 · softgarden 42
5.2 weighted points to iMocha
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iMocha 44 · softgarden 22
4.0 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iMocha 66 · softgarden 54
1.8 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iMocha 38 · softgarden 30
1.2 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
iMocha 64 · softgarden 58
0.7 weighted points to iMocha
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iMocha 66 · softgarden 58
0.6 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iMocha 48 · softgarden 44
0.5 weighted points to iMocha
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +14.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iMocha minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | iMocha | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 42 | +26 | +5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 44 | 22 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 66 | 54 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 44 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 42 (F) | +14 | +14.0 |
§ 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 | iMocha | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 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; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iMocha last reviewed
- July 17, 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