 Based on the provided information, here are the main differences between the treatment of the protected and unprotected groups:

1. Screening Process: The protected group seems to undergo more extensive screening than the unprotected group. In the protected group, there are several instances where the applicant is subjected to "Extensive Screening", which is absent in most of the unprotected group's process variants. This could imply a more rigorous approval process for the protected group.

2. Rejection Rates: The protected group appears to have a higher rejection rate. There are several instances in the protected group's process variants where the prospective tenant is rejected either after viewing the property or after an extensive screening process. In contrast, the unprotected group has fewer instances of rejection, and most of these rejections occur before the viewing appointment.

3. Tenancy Period: The process variants for the protected group suggest that tenants have shorter tenancy periods compared to the unprotected group. This is evidenced by the frequency of "Tenant Cancels Appartment" actions in the protected group's variants, which occur after fewer "Pay Rent" actions compared to the unprotected group.

4. Eviction: The protected group has instances of eviction (Issue Warning -> Evict Tenant), which is not present in the unprotected group's process variants. This could suggest a stricter enforcement of tenancy rules for the protected group.

5. Process Complexity: The process variants for the protected group seem to be more complex, involving more steps than those of the unprotected group. This could indicate a more involved application and tenancy process for the protected group.

6. Performance Time: The total performance time for the process variants is generally higher for the protected group than for the unprotected group. This could suggest that the overall process takes longer for the protected group.

These differences could be attributed to various factors, including potential biases in screening and approval processes, different treatment of tenants, or varying policies for the two groups. However, a more detailed analysis would be needed to confirm these hypotheses.