§ The result
Sense leads softgarden on all 7 criteria.
Sense finishes 16 points clear of softgarden under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 42 — across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. Sense leads every one of the 7 criteria, softgarden none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Sense 58 to softgarden 54. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Sense 72, softgarden 22) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 55% of the weighted advantage Sense holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
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
Sense is filed under Screening AI, softgarden under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Sense | softgarden |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sense 72 · softgarden 22
9.0 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sense 60 · softgarden 42
3.6 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sense 38 · softgarden 30
1.2 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sense 52 · softgarden 44
1.0 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sense 64 · softgarden 58
0.7 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sense 58 · softgarden 54
0.6 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sense 62 · softgarden 58
0.3 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +16.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +16.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sense minus softgarden.
| Category | Weight | Sense | softgarden | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 42 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 72 | 22 | +50 | +9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 44 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 42 (F) | +16 | +16.4 |
§ 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 | Sense | softgarden | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | 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 a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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% | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 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 Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sense 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