§ The result
Humanly leads Arena Analytics by 10 points.
Humanly sits 10 points above Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0, 42 against 32, with both filed under Screening. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Humanly: Humanly is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Arena Analytics on Data Governance Disclosure. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Arena Analytics 38, Humanly 58) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Arena Analytics 30, Humanly 45), the second being 27% of the weighted advantage Humanly 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
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
§ The record
Arena Analytics and Humanly are both filed under Screening 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 | Humanly |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Humanly 45
3.0 weighted points to Humanly
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Humanly 40
2.7 weighted points to Humanly
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Humanly 58
2.4 weighted points to Humanly
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · Humanly 35
1.5 weighted points to Humanly
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Humanly 52
1.1 weighted points to Humanly
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Humanly 40
0.3 weighted points to Arena Analytics
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Humanly 30
0.2 weighted points to Humanly
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.3 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 -10.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Humanly.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Humanly | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 45 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 40 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 42 (F) | -10 | -10.7 |
§ 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 | Humanly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 12 | 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; Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Humanly 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