HomeCompareArena Analytics vs softgarden

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Arena Analytics vs softgarden

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

softgarden leads Arena Analytics by 10 points.

softgarden sits 10 points above Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0 — 42 against 32 — with softgarden filed under ATS-integrated and Arena Analytics under Screening. softgarden leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Arena Analytics leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Human Oversight Design is the widest raw gap (Arena Analytics 38, softgarden 58) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Arena Analytics 30, softgarden 42), 22% of the weighted advantage softgarden builds across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, softgarden 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.

RecordArena Analyticssoftgarden
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersUSDE
Founded20152001

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 21% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Arena Analytics 30 · softgarden 42

    2.4 weighted points to softgarden

  2. 12% weight · 42% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Arena Analytics 38 · softgarden 58

    2.4 weighted points to softgarden

  3. 12% weight · 59% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Arena Analytics 28 · softgarden 44

    1.9 weighted points to softgarden

  4. 15% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Arena Analytics 42 · softgarden 54

    1.8 weighted points to softgarden

  5. 8% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Arena Analytics 38 · softgarden 58

    1.6 weighted points to softgarden

  6. 15% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Arena Analytics 25 · softgarden 30

    0.8 weighted points to softgarden

  7. 18% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Arena Analytics 25 · softgarden 22

    0.5 weighted points to Arena Analytics

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 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 -10.3.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Arena Analytics minus softgarden.

CategoryWeightArena AnalyticssoftgardenΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3042-12-2.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%2522+3+0.5
FRIA Support15%2530-5-0.8
Data Governance Disclosure15%4254-12-1.8
Human Oversight Design12%3858-20-2.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%2844-16-1.9
Customer Documentation8%3858-20-1.6
Total100%32 (F)42 (F)-10-10.3

§ 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.

CriterionWeightArena Analyticssoftgarden
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on a separate domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21—31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Sources on the vendor's own domain70Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%61Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain51Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%237Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain315Audit 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; softgarden has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 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 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for softgarden, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Arena Analytics last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
softgarden 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.