§ The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads softgarden by 14 points.
Rubric v1.0 scores the ATS-integrated entries Workday Recruiting AI and softgarden at 56 and 42, a gap of 14 points. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Workday Recruiting AI: Workday Recruiting AI is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and softgarden on Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — softgarden 22, Workday Recruiting AI 60 — and at an 18% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI holds across the 6 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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
§ The record
softgarden and Workday Recruiting AI are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only softgarden is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | softgarden | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2001 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
softgarden 22 · Workday Recruiting AI 60
6.8 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
softgarden 42 · Workday Recruiting AI 70
5.6 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
softgarden 44 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.1 weighted points to softgarden
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
softgarden 58 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.8 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
softgarden 30 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
softgarden 58 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.6 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
softgarden 54 · Workday Recruiting AI 55
0.1 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -13.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is softgarden minus Workday Recruiting AI.
| Category | Weight | softgarden | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 70 | -28 | -5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 60 | -38 | -6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 65 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 35 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 65 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 56 (F) | -14 | -13.7 |
§ 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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
softgarden has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- softgarden last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI last reviewed
- May 21, 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