§ The result
1 point separates softgarden and Willo.
softgarden holds a 1-point edge over Willo under rubric v1.0, 42 to 41, across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. softgarden leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Willo leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Willo — softgarden 22, Willo 30, on an 18% weight — which is 75% of the weighted advantage Willo holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
§ The record
softgarden is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Willo under Video interview 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 Willo is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | softgarden | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | DE | GB |
| Founded | 2001 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
softgarden 22 · Willo 30
1.4 weighted points to Willo
12% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
softgarden 44 · Willo 36
1.0 weighted points to softgarden
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
softgarden 42 · Willo 38
0.8 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
softgarden 30 · Willo 25
0.8 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
softgarden 58 · Willo 62
0.5 weighted points to Willo
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
softgarden 58 · Willo 54
0.3 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
softgarden 54 · Willo 53
0.1 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is softgarden minus Willo.
| Category | Weight | softgarden | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 30 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 53 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 36 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 41 (F) | +1 | +1.1 |
§ 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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 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; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- softgarden last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo last reviewed
- June 7, 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