§ The result
softgarden leads Pulsifi on all 7 criteria.
softgarden scores 42 and Pulsifi 33 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. softgarden is ahead of Pulsifi on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Pulsifi 20 to softgarden 22. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Pulsifi 28, softgarden 44) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Pulsifi 30, softgarden 42), 27% of the weighted advantage softgarden builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Pulsifi
Pulsifi gives candidates and employees 0-100 Role Fit and Organizational Fit scores that combine personality, work-interest, work-culture and cognitive assessments with AI resume and skills analysis, and uses the scores to rank people for hiring, internal mobility and succession.
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
Pulsifi 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, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Pulsifi is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pulsifi | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | DE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pulsifi 30 · softgarden 42
2.4 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pulsifi 40 · softgarden 54
2.1 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pulsifi 28 · softgarden 44
1.9 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pulsifi 46 · softgarden 58
1.0 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pulsifi 25 · softgarden 30
0.8 weighted points to softgarden
18% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pulsifi 20 · softgarden 22
0.4 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pulsifi 55 · softgarden 58
0.4 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -8.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pulsifi minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Pulsifi | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 54 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 44 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 46 | 58 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 42 (F) | -9 | -8.9 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Pulsifi | 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 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 2 | 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% | 26 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Pulsifi has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 7 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 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Pulsifi, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pulsifi 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