HomeCompareArena Analytics vs Cezanne Recruitment

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Arena Analytics vs Cezanne Recruitment

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Cezanne Recruitment leads Arena Analytics by 9 points.

Cezanne Recruitment scores 41 and Arena Analytics 32 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Cezanne Recruitment leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Human Oversight Design, while Arena Analytics leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. The advantage Cezanne Recruitment holds is spread out: Human Oversight Design is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arena Analytics 38, Cezanne Recruitment 58, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 24% of the weighted points Cezanne Recruitment gains across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Cezanne Recruitment under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Arena Analytics is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordArena AnalyticsCezanne Recruitment
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded20152012

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 12% weight · 23% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Arena Analytics 38 · Cezanne Recruitment 58

    2.4 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  2. 20% weight · 43% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Arena Analytics 30 · Cezanne Recruitment 40

    2.0 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  3. 12% weight · 62% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Arena Analytics 28 · Cezanne Recruitment 44

    1.9 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  4. 15% weight · 79% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Arena Analytics 42 · Cezanne Recruitment 54

    1.8 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  5. 8% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Arena Analytics 38 · Cezanne Recruitment 57

    1.5 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  6. 15% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Arena Analytics 25 · Cezanne Recruitment 28

    0.4 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  7. 18% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Arena Analytics 25 · Cezanne Recruitment 24

    0.2 weighted points to Arena Analytics

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -9.9.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Arena Analytics minus Cezanne Recruitment.

CategoryWeightArena AnalyticsCezanne RecruitmentΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3040-10-2.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2524+1+0.2
FRIA Support15%2528-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%4254-12-1.8
Human Oversight Design12%3858-20-2.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%2844-16-1.9
Customer Documentation8%3857-19-1.5
Total100%32 (F)41 (F)-9-9.9

§ 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.

CriterionWeightArena AnalyticsCezanne Recruitment
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21—31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%61Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%237Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain256Sources 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; Cezanne Recruitment has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 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 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for Cezanne Recruitment, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Arena Analytics last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Cezanne Recruitment 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.