§ The result
softgarden leads RecruitBot on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 42 and RecruitBot, filed under Sourcing, on 37, 5 points apart. RecruitBot is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: softgarden takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is FRIA Support, RecruitBot 27 to softgarden 30. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (RecruitBot 33, softgarden 42, 20% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage softgarden builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
RecruitBot
RecruitBot is an AI sourcing platform that searches a proprietary database of 655M+ candidate profiles, re-ranks results with machine learning trained on each recruiter's star ratings, and automates personalized email outreach.
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
RecruitBot is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, softgarden under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only softgarden is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | RecruitBot | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2017 | 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
RecruitBot 33 · softgarden 42
1.8 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
RecruitBot 50 · softgarden 58
1.0 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
RecruitBot 48 · softgarden 54
0.9 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
RecruitBot 40 · softgarden 44
0.5 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
RecruitBot 27 · softgarden 30
0.4 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
RecruitBot 55 · softgarden 58
0.2 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -4.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is RecruitBot minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | RecruitBot | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 42 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 22 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 27 | 30 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 54 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 44 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 42 (F) | -5 | -4.8 |
§ 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 | RecruitBot | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
RecruitBot has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 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 RecruitBot sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for RecruitBot, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- RecruitBot 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