How we make this list: we compare pricing pages, product documentation and public user reviews. Ratings come from G2, Capterra or Trustpilot, with the date we checked them.
Key takeaways
- Manatal is the value pick: AI scoring and enrichment on plans reported from $15 per user per month, usable by a small hiring team on day one.
- Workable, Greenhouse, and Ashby are full applicant tracking systems whose AI screening sits inside a complete hiring platform.
- Paradox and HireVue aim at high volume hiring, where conversational AI and structured assessments replace the first human pass over applications.
- The legal duty stays with you. A screening model that filters out protected groups creates liability for the employer, not the vendor, so audit outcomes before and after you switch it on.
- In New York City, Local Law 144 requires a bias audit and candidate notice before automated decision tools are used in hiring. Other US states are adding their own rules.
Quick comparison
| Tool | Best for | Starting price | Free plan |
|---|
 Manatal | AI scoring on a budget | $15 per user per month | No |
 Workable | Small teams wanting ATS plus AI | $169 per month | No |
 Greenhouse | Structured hiring at scale | See website | No |
 Ashby | Data driven recruiting teams | See website | No |
 Lever | Pipeline and sourcing focus | See website | No |
 SmartRecruiters | Enterprise hiring suites | See website | No |
 Paradox | High volume frontline hiring | See website | No |
 HireVue | Assessments and video screening | See website | No |
Is your product missing or out of date?
We review this list regularly. Vendors can request a listing, send updated pricing or ask about featured placement.
The best AI resume screening software
#1Manatal
Best for: AI scoring on a budget4.8/5 on
G2 (147 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit manatal.com
Starting price$15 per user per month
Free planNo
Manatal brings AI screening to small teams: it parses resumes into profiles, enriches them from public sources, and scores each candidate against the role so recruiters read the strongest matches first. At a reported $15 per user per month entry price, it is a fraction of enterprise ATS cost.
The trade off is depth against price. Manatal will not run a global multi brand hiring operation, and its AI needs your past good hires to learn from. Manatal fits small and mid size companies and agencies that want ranked shortlists without an enterprise contract.
What we like- AI recommendations score candidates against the job
- Enrichment pulls public profile data into the record
- Prices reported from $15 per user per month
- Quick to set up for a small team
Watch out for- AI scoring quality depends on your job data
- Smaller ATS feature set than enterprise tools
- Bias monitoring is your job, not a built in audit
#2Workable
Best for: Small teams wanting ATS plus AI4.4/5 on
G2 (706 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit workable.com
Starting price$169 per month
Free planNo
Workable wraps AI screening inside an applicant tracking system small teams genuinely enjoy: post once to many job boards, let the AI surface and score applicants, and move people through a clean pipeline. Pricing is reported from $169 per month for companies up to fifty staff on annual billing, with higher tiers adding more AI and automation.
The trade off is ease against ceiling. Very large or heavily regulated hiring will want stronger audit tooling. Workable fits growing companies hiring steadily across a handful of roles who want AI help without a procurement project.
What we like- AI candidate sourcing and screening inside a friendly ATS
- Strong job board distribution
- Plans reported from $169 per month for small companies
- Video and assessments available
Watch out for- AI features deepen on higher tiers
- Per job pricing history confuses comparisons
- Enterprise governance is lighter than Greenhouse
#3Greenhouse
Best for: Structured hiring at scale4.4/5 on
G2 (4,033 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit greenhouse.com
Starting priceSee website
Free planNo
Greenhouse sells discipline: structured scorecards, defined rubrics, and reporting that lets you see where candidates fall out of the process and whether that fallout is even across groups. Its AI features assist sourcing and summarising rather than deciding alone, which is the posture employment lawyers prefer.
The trade off is rigour against cost and effort. Greenhouse is bought by quote and pays back only if the company actually hires its way. Greenhouse fits mid size and large employers who want defensible, consistent hiring and the data to prove how their funnel behaves.
What we like- The benchmark for structured hiring process
- AI features support sourcing, screening summaries, and interview kits
- Deep integration marketplace
- Strong reporting for fairness monitoring
Watch out for- Quote based pricing at the premium end
- Value depends on adopting its structured process
- Implementation takes real change management
#4Ashby
Best for: Data driven recruiting teams4.7/5 on
G2 (212 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit ashbyhq.com
Starting priceSee website
Free planNo
Ashby is the modern ATS built around data: every stage of the funnel is measurable, AI helps find and sequence candidates, and screening summaries keep reviewers focused on evidence. Technology companies adopted it fast because their recruiting teams think in dashboards.
The trade off is sophistication against simplicity. A five person company will use a tenth of it. Ashby fits scaling companies, roughly a hundred hires a year and up, that treat recruiting as an operation to be measured and improved.
What we like- Analytics are the strongest in this group
- AI assistance across sourcing and scheduling
- Loved by technology company recruiting teams
- Clean, fast interface
Watch out for- Quote based pricing
- Analytics depth needs a recruiting operations mindset
- Younger platform than Greenhouse or Lever
#5Lever
Best for: Pipeline and sourcing focus4.3/5 on
G2 (2,123 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit lever.co
Starting priceSee website
Free planNo
Lever built its name on the pipeline before the application: sourcing, nurturing, and keeping silver medalist candidates engaged until the right role opens. Its screening and automation sit inside that CRM first design, and it now sits inside Employ's suite of hiring brands.
The trade off is sourcing strength against analytics depth. Lever fits companies whose problem is finding enough qualified people, especially repeat hiring into the same roles, more than companies drowning in applications.
What we like- Combines ATS with candidate relationship management
- Nurture campaigns keep past applicants warm
- AI assisted sourcing
- Now part of Employ alongside JazzHR and Jobvite
Watch out for- Quote based pricing
- Reporting historically trailed rivals
- Product direction under new ownership is a fair question to ask
Starting priceSee website
Free planNo
SmartRecruiters aims at the enterprise end: a full talent acquisition suite whose AI assistant screens and matches across very large applicant pools, in many languages and countries. It is bought by companies for whom hiring is a permanent industrial process.
The trade off is scale against weight. Everything about it assumes an internal recruiting department. SmartRecruiters fits large employers hiring across regions who need one governed platform rather than a patchwork.
What we like- Enterprise grade suite with an AI assistant, Winston
- Global and high volume capability
- Marketplace of integrated tools
- Strong in retail and multi country hiring
Watch out for- Enterprise pricing and implementation
- Small teams will find it heavy
- AI features vary by package
#7Paradox
Best for: High volume frontline hiring4.5/5 on
G2 (94 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit paradox.ai
Starting priceSee website
Free planNo
Paradox replaces the application pile with a conversation. Olivia answers candidate questions, screens against your criteria, and books interviews by text, around the clock. For employers hiring hundreds of frontline staff, the bottleneck Paradox removes is scheduling and first contact, not resume nuance.
The trade off is focus against range. It is not where a company screens senior engineers. Paradox fits high volume hourly hiring where speed decides whether a candidate starts with you or with the competitor across the street.
What we like- Conversational assistant, Olivia, screens and schedules by text and chat
- Built for hourly and frontline volume
- Cuts time to interview sharply
- Used by large restaurant, retail, and logistics employers
Watch out for- Screening is conversational and criteria based rather than deep resume analysis
- Enterprise pricing
- Fit is narrow by design
#8HireVue
Best for: Assessments and video screening4.1/5 on
G2 (255 reviews, checked Oct 2026)
Visit hirevue.com
Starting priceSee website
Free planNo
HireVue screens with structured interviews and assessments rather than resume ranking, and it publishes validation work because its category attracts regulator and press attention. It dropped facial analysis from its assessments years ago under that scrutiny, and it documents bias testing as part of the product.
The trade off is assessment depth against perception and governance load. You will answer candidate and possibly regulator questions about how it works. HireVue fits large employers with standardised high volume roles who can run the validation, notice, and audit process properly.
What we like- Structured video interviews and game based assessments
- AI scored assessments validated by industrial psychologists
- Enterprise scale and language coverage
- Strong compliance documentation
Watch out for- The most legally scrutinised category in this guide
- Pricing by quote at enterprise level
- Candidate experience divides opinion
How we chose
We compared the platforms US employers shortlist for AI assisted screening, checking what the AI actually does: ranking resumes, enriching profiles, conversational screening, or scored assessments are different products wearing one label. We favoured tools with published approaches to fairness testing and recorded pricing where vendors publish it, marking the quote based majority as See website. Features were weighed below governance: a screening tool you cannot audit is a liability with a login screen.
How to choose AI resume screening software
Start with the law, then the workflow. In the US, Title VII makes you responsible for a screen with discriminatory impact whatever the vendor promised, New York City's Local Law 144 requires an independent bias audit and notice to candidates before automated decision tools are used, Illinois regulates AI in hiring and video interviews, and the EEOC has warned that existing civil rights law fully applies to algorithmic screening. Ask every vendor for their validation studies, adverse impact data, and audit support, and walk away from any that cannot explain, in plain language, what their model uses and ignores. Verify outputs yourself: run your last hundred hires and rejects through the tool and compare its ranking with the outcomes you know. Set the tool to rank and recommend rather than auto reject wherever you can, keep a human decision on every rejection, and re check outcome data by group each quarter. The time saving is real, but it is only safe bought with monitoring.
Frequently asked questions
Is AI resume screening legal for US employers?
It is legal to use, and fully subject to anti discrimination law. The EEOC applies Title VII to algorithmic tools, New York City requires bias audits and candidate notice under Local Law 144, and Illinois has its own AI hiring rules. Get employment counsel to review your setup before launch, not after a complaint.
Can AI screening be biased?
Yes. A model trained on your past successful hires learns the pattern of who you hired, including any bias inside it, and resume data carries proxies for age, sex, and race such as names, colleges, and graduation dates. Validation, adverse impact testing, and human review are how employers control that risk.
Should the software reject candidates automatically?
Rank first, reject carefully. Auto rejection at scale is where legal and reputational damage concentrates, because no human ever sees the borderline cases the model got wrong. Most defensible setups use AI to order and summarise, with a person making each rejection decision.
How much does AI screening software cost?
Manatal reports plans from $15 per user per month and Workable from $169 per month for small companies. Full ATS platforms such as Greenhouse, Ashby, and SmartRecruiters price by quote, typically scaling with employees and hiring volume, and enterprise deals reach five or six figures a year.
What should I ask a vendor about fairness?
Ask for validation evidence for the specific feature you will use, the data the model trains on, adverse impact results, whether protected class data or its proxies are inputs, and what audit exports exist. Note the answers in your procurement file; regulators and courts both respect a paper trail.
Does AI screening actually save time?
Yes, on the mechanical work: parsing, matching keywords and experience to the role, deduplication, and scheduling can cut first pass review time dramatically in high volume hiring. It saves nothing if recruiters must re read everything because they do not trust the ranking, which is why a pilot on one role family comes first.
Sources we checked (0)
Is your product missing or out of date?
We review this list regularly. Vendors can request a listing, send updated pricing or ask about featured placement.
Shihab Mia · Founder, Rankite
Shihab has 5+ years in B2B and SaaS SEO. He writes Rankite's software buying guides from pricing pages, documentation and public user reviews. More about Shihab.