§ The result
Paycom leads Arena Analytics on all 7 criteria.
Paycom finishes 18 points clear of Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0 — 50 against 32 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Paycom leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Arena Analytics leads none. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Arena Analytics 30, Paycom 68) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage Paycom holds 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
Paycom
Paycom is a single-database human capital management and payroll platform whose applicant tracking system automates recruiting with resume parsing, keyword/knockout candidate filtering, automated correspondence, generative job-description writing, and a command-driven AI data-query engine (IWant).
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Paycom 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 | Paycom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1998 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Paycom 68
7.6 weighted points to Paycom
15% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Paycom 62
3.0 weighted points to Paycom
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Paycom 38
2.3 weighted points to Paycom
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Paycom 55
2.0 weighted points to Paycom
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Paycom 60
1.8 weighted points to Paycom
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Paycom 38
1.2 weighted points to Paycom
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · Paycom 30
0.8 weighted points to Paycom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -18.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -18 beside that -18.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Paycom.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Paycom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 68 | -38 | -7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 62 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 60 | -22 | -1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 50 (F) | -18 | -18.7 |
§ 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 | Paycom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | 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 | 13 | 7 | Audit reportSources 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; Paycom has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 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 Paycom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paycom last reviewed
- July 17, 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