§ The result
softgarden leads TestDome by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 42 and TestDome, filed under Assessment, on 37, 5 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of softgarden: softgarden is ahead on Post-Market Monitoring and TestDome on Customer Documentation. The advantage softgarden holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (softgarden 44, TestDome 30, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 34% of the weighted points softgarden gains across the 6 criteria it leads.
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
TestDome
TestDome sells pay-per-candidate online skills tests for coding, Excel and more than 100 other skills. The tests are scored automatically, and open-ended answers can be scored by AI. AI analysis of webcam and screen proctoring recordings flags possible cheating, and a live code-interview tool is included.
§ The record
softgarden is filed under ATS-integrated AI, TestDome 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 TestDome is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | softgarden | TestDome |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | DE | HR |
| Founded | 2001 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
softgarden 44 · TestDome 30
1.7 weighted points to softgarden
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
softgarden 22 · TestDome 15
1.3 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
softgarden 58 · TestDome 52
0.7 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
softgarden 54 · TestDome 50
0.6 weighted points to softgarden
20% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
softgarden 42 · TestDome 40
0.4 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
softgarden 30 · TestDome 28
0.3 weighted points to softgarden
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
softgarden 58 · TestDome 60
0.2 weighted points to TestDome
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.1 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 softgarden minus TestDome.
| Category | Weight | softgarden | TestDome | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 15 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 50 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 30 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 37 (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 | softgarden | TestDome | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 27 | 5 | 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; TestDome has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for TestDome, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- softgarden last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TestDome 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