Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Arena Analytics vs Cognisess
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.
Substantial gaps
Screening
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
2 points separate Arena Analytics and Cognisess.
Arena Analytics holds a 2-point edge over Cognisess under rubric v1.0, 32 to 30, across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to Arena Analytics and Cognisess, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Arena Analytics holds, headed by Article 11 Technical Documentation, settle the total. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Arena Analytics 30, Cognisess 25, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage Arena Analytics holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Arena Analytics3
- Cognisess3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation30 vs 25
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Cognisess under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Arena Analytics | Cognisess |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2015 | 2011 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight27% of the movement so far
Arena Analytics30Cognisess251.0 weighted points to Arena Analytics
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight50% of the movement so far
Arena Analytics25Cognisess200.9 weighted points to Arena Analytics
- 3
FRIA Support
15% weight70% of the movement so far
Arena Analytics25Cognisess200.8 weighted points to Arena Analytics
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight83% of the movement so far
Arena Analytics38Cognisess420.5 weighted points to Cognisess
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight96% of the movement so far
Arena Analytics28Cognisess320.5 weighted points to Cognisess
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Arena Analytics38Cognisess400.2 weighted points to Cognisess
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +1.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +1.5.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Cognisess, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Cognisess | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 32 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 32F | 30F | +2 | +1.5 |
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 | Cognisess | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Arena Analytics has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Arena Analytics and Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cognisess 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.