§ The result
Factorial leads Arena Analytics on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Factorial sits 14 points above Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 32 — with Factorial filed under ATS-integrated and Arena Analytics under Screening. Factorial leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Arena Analytics is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Factorial leads is FRIA Support, Arena Analytics 25 to Factorial 35. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Arena Analytics 30, Factorial 52, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 30% of the weighted advantage Factorial holds across the 6 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
Factorial
Factorial is a Barcelona-based all-in-one HR, finance and IT platform for small and mid-sized businesses. Its applicant tracking system has optional AI matching, which shows a percentage fit for applicants it recommends interviewing, plus CV summaries, AI-written job posts and AI Calls, where a voice agent phone-screens candidates and gives each a match label that can move them to the next stage automatically.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Factorial 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.
| Record | Arena Analytics | Factorial |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | ES |
| Founded | 2015 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Factorial 52
4.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Factorial 58
2.4 weighted points to Factorial
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Factorial 48
2.4 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Factorial 57
2.3 weighted points to Factorial
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Factorial 60
1.8 weighted points to Factorial
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · Factorial 35
1.5 weighted points to Factorial
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -14.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -14.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Factorial.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Factorial | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 52 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 57 | -15 | -2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 48 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 60 | -22 | -1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 46 (F) | -14 | -14.7 |
§ 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 | Factorial | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | 4 | 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 | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources 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; Factorial has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 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 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Factorial, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Factorial 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.
§ Where next