§ The result
Workstream leads Arena Analytics by 7 points.
Workstream finishes 7 points ahead of Arena Analytics under rubric v1.0, 39 to 32, both scored as Screening entries. Arena Analytics takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Workstream, whose share includes Human Oversight Design. Even Human Oversight Design, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arena Analytics 38, Workstream 61, 12% weight), is only 34% of the weighted advantage Workstream builds 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
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
Arena Analytics and Workstream are both filed under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arena Analytics | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arena Analytics 38 · Workstream 61
2.8 weighted points to Workstream
20% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arena Analytics 30 · Workstream 40
2.0 weighted points to Workstream
8% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arena Analytics 38 · Workstream 56
1.4 weighted points to Workstream
18% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arena Analytics 25 · Workstream 20
0.9 weighted points to Arena Analytics
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arena Analytics 28 · Workstream 35
0.8 weighted points to Workstream
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arena Analytics 42 · Workstream 47
0.8 weighted points to Workstream
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arena Analytics 25 · Workstream 27
0.3 weighted points to Workstream
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arena Analytics minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Arena Analytics | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 47 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 38 | 61 | -23 | -2.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 56 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 32 (F) | 39 (F) | -7 | -7.2 |
§ 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 | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Arena Analytics has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Arena Analytics and Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for Arena Analytics, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arena Analytics last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream 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.
§ Where next