§ The result
Oleeo leads Arena Analytics on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Oleeo, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 40 and Arena Analytics, filed under Screening, on 32, 8 points apart. Arena Analytics is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Oleeo takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Post-Market Monitoring, Arena Analytics 28 to Oleeo 30. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Arena Analytics 38, Oleeo 55) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Arena Analytics 25, Oleeo 40), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Oleeo 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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Oleeo 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 | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2015 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Oleeo 40
2.7 weighted points to Oleeo
12% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Oleeo 55
2.0 weighted points to Oleeo
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Oleeo 40
2.0 weighted points to Oleeo
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Oleeo 55
1.4 weighted points to Oleeo
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Oleeo 45
0.4 weighted points to Oleeo
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Oleeo 30
0.2 weighted points to Oleeo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -8.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 40 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 40 (F) | -8 | -8.8 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 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 | 10 | 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; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 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 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo 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