HomeCompareRecruitee vs softgarden

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Recruitee vs softgarden

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Recruitee and softgarden tie at 42.

Recruitee and softgarden tie at 42 under rubric v1.0 inside the ATS-integrated cohort, arriving there from different criteria. Recruitee leads 1 of the 7 criteria and softgarden 3, with 3 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Recruitee 30, softgarden 22) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 100% of the weighted advantage Recruitee holds across the 1 criterion it leads.

§ The record

Recruitee and softgarden are both filed 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.

RecordRecruiteesoftgarden
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersNLDE
Founded20152001

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 54% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Recruitee 30 · softgarden 22

    1.4 weighted points to Recruitee

  2. 12% weight · 72% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Recruitee 40 · softgarden 44

    0.5 weighted points to softgarden

  3. 15% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Recruitee 27 · softgarden 30

    0.4 weighted points to softgarden

  4. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Recruitee 52 · softgarden 54

    0.3 weighted points to softgarden

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +0.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Recruitee minus softgarden.

CategoryWeightRecruiteesoftgardenΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4242--
Bias Audit Transparency18%3022+8+1.4
FRIA Support15%2730-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5254-2-0.3
Human Oversight Design12%5858--
Post-Market Monitoring12%4044-4-0.5
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%42 (F)42 (F)-+0.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightRecruiteesoftgarden
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%11—31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%31Sources on the vendor's own domain70Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%147Sources on the vendor's own domain315Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Recruitee has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 21 for Recruitee, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Recruitee last reviewed
July 17, 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.