§ The result
Phenom leads Arena Analytics on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Phenom finishes 20 points clear of Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0 — 52 against 32 — across the Sourcing and Screening cohorts. Phenom leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Arena Analytics is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Phenom leads is Post-Market Monitoring, Arena Analytics 28 to Phenom 30. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Arena Analytics 25, Phenom 75) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds across the 6 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
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Phenom under Candidate sourcing 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 | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Phenom 75
9.0 weighted points to Phenom
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Phenom 55
5.0 weighted points to Phenom
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Phenom 60
2.7 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Phenom 60
2.6 weighted points to Phenom
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Phenom 55
1.4 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Phenom 30
0.2 weighted points to Phenom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -20.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -20 beside that -20.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Phenom.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 55 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 75 | -50 | -9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 60 | -18 | -2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 60 | -22 | -2.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 52 (F) | -20 | -20.9 |
§ 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 | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 2 | 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; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 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 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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