§ The result
softgarden and Talogy tie at 42.
softgarden (ATS-integrated) and Talogy (Assessment) tie at 42 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. softgarden leads 4 of the 7 criteria and Talogy 2, with 1 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Article 11 Technical Documentation, at 20%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Talogy (softgarden 42, Talogy 53), 60% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Post-Market Monitoring, softgarden 44 to Talogy 32.
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.
Vendor profile
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
softgarden is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Talogy under Assessment 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. Only Talogy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | softgarden | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2001 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
softgarden 42 · Talogy 53
2.2 weighted points to Talogy
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
softgarden 22 · Talogy 30
1.4 weighted points to Talogy
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
softgarden 44 · Talogy 32
1.4 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
softgarden 30 · Talogy 25
0.8 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
softgarden 58 · Talogy 52
0.7 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
softgarden 54 · Talogy 52
0.3 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.8 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 -0.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is softgarden minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | softgarden | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 53 | -11 | -2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 30 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 32 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 42 (F) | - | -0.4 |
§ 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 | softgarden | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
softgarden has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- softgarden last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy last reviewed
- August 2, 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