§ The result
Fountain leads Arena Analytics on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under Screening, Fountain and Arena Analytics come out 44 and 32 under rubric v1.0, 12 points in favour of Fountain. Fountain leads every one of the 7 criteria, Arena Analytics none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Bias Audit Transparency, Arena Analytics 25 to Fountain 30. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arena Analytics 30, Fountain 50, 20% weight), is only 32% of the weighted advantage Fountain builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Fountain
AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
§ The record
Arena Analytics and Fountain are both filed under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
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 | Fountain |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Fountain 50
4.0 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Fountain 58
2.4 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Fountain 55
1.9 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Fountain 40
1.4 weighted points to Fountain
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Fountain 52
1.1 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Fountain 30
0.9 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · Fountain 30
0.8 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Fountain.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Fountain | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 50 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 44 (F) | -12 | -12.6 |
§ 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 | Fountain | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 3 | 0 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 6 | 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; Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 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