§ The result
softgarden leads micro1 by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 42 and micro1, filed under Screening, on 36, 6 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of softgarden: softgarden is ahead on Post-Market Monitoring and micro1 on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (micro1 25, softgarden 44, 12% weight), but it accounts for only 31% of the weighted advantage softgarden holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
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
micro1 is filed under Screening AI, softgarden under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only micro1 is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | micro1 | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2022 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
micro1 25 · softgarden 44
2.3 weighted points to softgarden
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
micro1 50 · softgarden 42
1.6 weighted points to micro1
15% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
micro1 45 · softgarden 54
1.3 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
micro1 22 · softgarden 30
1.2 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
micro1 48 · softgarden 58
1.2 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
micro1 45 · softgarden 58
1.0 weighted points to softgarden
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
micro1 20 · softgarden 22
0.4 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is micro1 minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | micro1 | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 30 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 54 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 44 | -19 | -2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 36 (F) | 42 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | micro1 | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 2 | 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% | 7 | 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% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 25 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 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 micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- micro1 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.
§ Where next