§ The result
2 points separate HireLogic and Arena Analytics.
HireLogic holds a 2-point edge over Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0, 34 to 32, across the Video interview and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 1 in favour of HireLogic, with 2 level: HireLogic is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Arena Analytics on Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arena Analytics 30, HireLogic 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 52% of the weighted advantage HireLogic holds across the 4 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
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, HireLogic under Video interview 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 | HireLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · HireLogic 42
2.4 weighted points to HireLogic
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · HireLogic 15
1.8 weighted points to Arena Analytics
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · HireLogic 48
1.2 weighted points to HireLogic
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · HireLogic 45
0.6 weighted points to HireLogic
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · HireLogic 45
0.4 weighted points to HireLogic
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -2.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 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 -2.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus HireLogic.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | HireLogic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 15 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 34 (F) | -2 | -2.8 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 3 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 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; HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 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 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireLogic 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