§ The result
Plum leads softgarden by 12 points.
Plum sits 12 points above softgarden under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 42 — with Plum filed under Assessment and softgarden under ATS-integrated. Plum and softgarden each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Plum holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Plum 83, softgarden 22) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 75% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Plum
Plum is a pre-employment talent assessment platform that uses a Five-Factor (Big Five) psychometric Discovery Survey and a Talent Match model to score and rank candidates on behavioral "durable skills" for role fit, hiring, and development.
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
Plum 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 Plum is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Plum | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | CA | DE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Plum 83 · softgarden 22
11.0 weighted points to Plum
20% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Plum 58 · softgarden 42
3.2 weighted points to Plum
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Plum 36 · softgarden 44
1.0 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Plum 52 · softgarden 58
0.7 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Plum 63 · softgarden 58
0.4 weighted points to Plum
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Plum 28 · softgarden 30
0.3 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +12.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Plum minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Plum | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 22 | +61 | +11.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 54 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 44 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 42 (F) | +12 | +12.6 |
§ 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 | Plum | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Plum last reviewed
- June 7, 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