§ The result
2 points separate softgarden and Pin.
softgarden holds a 2-point edge over Pin under rubric v1.0, 42 to 40, across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. Pin takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 4 for softgarden, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. softgarden takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Pin 30, softgarden 42), which is 57% of the weighted advantage softgarden holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, Pin 35 to softgarden 22.
Vendor profile
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
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
Pin 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.
| Record | Pin | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2024 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pin 30 · softgarden 42
2.4 weighted points to softgarden
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pin 35 · softgarden 22
2.3 weighted points to Pin
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pin 50 · softgarden 58
1.0 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pin 50 · softgarden 54
0.6 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pin 55 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pin 45 · softgarden 44
0.1 weighted points to Pin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -1.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pin minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Pin | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 42 (F) | -2 | -1.7 |
§ 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 | Pin | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 32 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 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 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pin 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