§ The result
3 points separate Ceipal and Arena Analytics.
Ceipal holds a 3-point edge over Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0, 35 to 32, across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 1 in favour of Ceipal, with 2 level: Ceipal is ahead on Post-Market Monitoring and Arena Analytics on Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (Arena Analytics 38, Ceipal 53) and Post-Market Monitoring at 12% (Arena Analytics 28, Ceipal 38), the second being 30% of the weighted advantage Ceipal holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Arena Analytics
Arena scores job applicants, mainly for healthcare and senior-living employers, on how likely they are to show up and stay in a specific role at a specific location, reroutes and sources candidates it rates likely to be retained, and applies the same outcome models to employee flight risk and internal mobility.
Vendor profile
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Ceipal under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Arena Analytics is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arena Analytics | Ceipal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Ceipal 38
1.2 weighted points to Ceipal
8% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Ceipal 53
1.2 weighted points to Ceipal
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Ceipal 46
1.0 weighted points to Ceipal
18% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Ceipal 20
0.9 weighted points to Arena Analytics
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Ceipal 46
0.6 weighted points to Ceipal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -3.1 — 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 -3 beside that -3.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Ceipal.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Ceipal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 46 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 46 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 53 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 35 (F) | -3 | -3.1 |
§ 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 | Arena Analytics | Ceipal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Arena Analytics has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Arena Analytics sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Ceipal 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