§ The result
HackerEarth leads Arena Analytics on all 7 criteria.
HackerEarth, filed under Assessment, comes out 14 points above Arena Analytics, filed under Screening: 46 against 32 under rubric v1.0. HackerEarth takes all 7 criteria and Arena Analytics none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Arena Analytics 25 to HackerEarth 32. The advantage HackerEarth holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arena Analytics 30, HackerEarth 55, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 34% of the weighted points HackerEarth gains 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
HackerEarth
HackerEarth is a technical-hiring platform that auto-scores coding assessments under AI proctoring, runs FaceCode live coding interviews with AI-generated summaries, and offers OnScreen, an AI video-avatar interviewer that scores candidates against a fixed rubric.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, HackerEarth under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arena Analytics | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · HackerEarth 55
5.0 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · HackerEarth 56
2.2 weighted points to HackerEarth
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · HackerEarth 35
1.8 weighted points to HackerEarth
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · HackerEarth 42
1.7 weighted points to HackerEarth
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · HackerEarth 57
1.5 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · HackerEarth 52
1.5 weighted points to HackerEarth
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · HackerEarth 32
1.1 weighted points to HackerEarth
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 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 HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 55 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 56 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 42 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 57 | -19 | -1.5 |
| 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 | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 34 | 5 | 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; HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 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 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HackerEarth 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