§ The result
UKG leads Arena Analytics on all 7 criteria.
UKG sits 12 points above Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0 — 44 against 32 — with UKG filed under ATS-integrated and Arena Analytics under Screening. UKG is ahead of Arena Analytics on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Arena Analytics 25 to UKG 30. The advantage UKG holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arena Analytics 30, UKG 48, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 29% of the weighted points UKG gains 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
UKG
UKG is an enterprise HCM and workforce-management suite whose UKG Pro Recruiting applicant-tracking module, augmented by the embedded Bryte AI layer, drafts job descriptions and produces profile-match candidate scores to rank and shortlist applicants.
§ The record
Arena Analytics is filed under Screening AI, UKG 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 | UKG |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · UKG 48
3.6 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · UKG 56
2.1 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · UKG 52
1.7 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · UKG 35
1.5 weighted points to UKG
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · UKG 55
1.4 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · UKG 38
1.2 weighted points to UKG
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · UKG 30
0.9 weighted points to UKG
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus UKG.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | UKG | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 56 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 55 | -17 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 44 (F) | -12 | -12.3 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Arena Analytics | UKG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | 2 | — |
| 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 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 2 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 8 | 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; UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 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 UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- UKG 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