§ The result
X0PA AI leads softgarden by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, X0PA AI, filed under Assessment, finishes on 48 and softgarden, filed under ATS-integrated, on 42, 6 points apart. X0PA AI leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while softgarden leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — softgarden 22, X0PA AI 44 — and at an 18% weight it carries 55% of the weighted advantage X0PA AI holds across the 5 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
X0PA AI
X0PA AI is a Singapore-based B2B AI recruitment platform (applicant tracking system) that sources, screens, scores, and ranks candidates using proprietary predictive-scoring models (BRIQ Score and Suitability Score) plus the X0PA ROOM video-interview/assessment product, marketed around bias-reduced, "responsible and explainable" AI hiring.
§ The record
softgarden is filed under ATS-integrated AI, X0PA AI 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 X0PA AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | softgarden | X0PA AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | DE | SG |
| Founded | 2001 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
softgarden 22 · X0PA AI 44
4.0 weighted points to X0PA AI
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
softgarden 42 · X0PA AI 50
1.6 weighted points to X0PA AI
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
softgarden 30 · X0PA AI 38
1.2 weighted points to X0PA AI
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
softgarden 44 · X0PA AI 40
0.5 weighted points to softgarden
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
softgarden 54 · X0PA AI 56
0.3 weighted points to X0PA AI
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
softgarden 58 · X0PA AI 60
0.2 weighted points to X0PA AI
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
softgarden 58 · X0PA AI 57
0.1 weighted points to softgarden
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is softgarden minus X0PA AI.
| Category | Weight | softgarden | X0PA AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 50 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 44 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 56 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 40 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 48 (F) | -6 | -6.6 |
§ 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 | X0PA AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
softgarden has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; X0PA AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for X0PA AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for X0PA AI, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- softgarden last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- X0PA AI last reviewed
- July 17, 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