§ The result
4 points separate Turing and Arena Analytics.
Turing (Assessment) edges Arena Analytics (Screening) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 36 to 32. Arena Analytics takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Post-Market Monitoring among them, against 5 for Turing, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Arena Analytics 30, Turing 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage Turing holds across the 5 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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arena Analytics | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Turing 42
2.4 weighted points to Turing
12% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Turing 45
0.8 weighted points to Turing
8% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Turing 48
0.8 weighted points to Turing
18% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Turing 28
0.5 weighted points to Turing
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Turing 44
0.3 weighted points to Turing
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Turing 27
0.1 weighted points to Arena Analytics
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 44 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 27 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 36 (F) | -4 | -4.8 |
§ 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 | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 7 | 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; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 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 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing 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