§ The result
Draup leads Arena Analytics on 5 of the 7 criteria.
Draup, filed under Sourcing, comes out 10 points above Arena Analytics, filed under Screening: 42 against 32 under rubric v1.0. Arena Analytics is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Draup takes 5, the remaining 2 are level, and the nearest of those 5 is Bias Audit Transparency, Arena Analytics 25 to Draup 33. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Arena Analytics 38, Draup 58) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Arena Analytics 30, Draup 48), the second being 33% of the weighted advantage Draup holds across the 5 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
Draup
Draup is an AI-powered talent- and sales-intelligence platform that aggregates over a billion public professional profiles into skills, roles and labour-market analytics, and surfaces ranked candidate shortlists for enterprise workforce planning and recruiting.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Draup under Candidate sourcing 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.
| Record | Arena Analytics | Draup |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Draup 48
3.6 weighted points to Draup
12% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Draup 58
2.4 weighted points to Draup
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Draup 54
1.8 weighted points to Draup
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Draup 57
1.5 weighted points to Draup
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Draup 33
1.4 weighted points to Draup
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -10.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Draup.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Draup | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 33 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 54 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 57 | -19 | -1.5 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 42 (F) | -10 | -10.8 |
§ 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 | Draup | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 7 | 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; Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Arena Analytics and Draup sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 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