After running the same 200-candidate placement scenario through 14 applicant tracking systems, the gap between platforms built for staffing agencies and those bolted onto corporate HR software was obvious within the first hour. Agency recruiting demands a CRM alongside the ATS. You manage client relationships, job orders, and candidate pipelines simultaneously - and most corporate-focused tools treat the client side as an afterthought.
I loaded identical candidate pools, created multi-client job orders, tested resume parsing on the same batch of 50 PDFs, and tracked how each system handled the split between temp placement workflows and direct-hire pipelines. Some platforms made that split seamless. Others required workarounds that would cost a recruiter 20 minutes per placement. These are the 14 that handled staffing agency workflows with varying degrees of competence.
At a Glance
Compare the top tools side-by-side
SMB Recruiting
Kanban pipeline with unlimited candidate storage
Front-to-Back Office
ATS plus payroll and billing in one platform
Staffing Automation
Advanced Boolean search across massive databases
AI Sourcing
Chrome extension imports and enriches LinkedIn profiles
Structured Hiring
Forced structured scorecards reduce hiring bias
Startups
Customizable analytics dashboards for recruiting metrics
In-House Recruitment
Flat-fee pricing with unlimited jobs and users
AI Notes
AI interview notetaker with competency-grouped summaries
What makes the best Applicant Tracking Systems for staffing agencies?
How we evaluate and test apps
Every platform on this list was tested using real staffing agency scenarios over several weeks. I created multi-client job orders, processed candidate submissions, ran resume parsing tests, and evaluated CRM functionality for business development workflows. No vendor paid for placement or influenced rankings. These reviews reflect hands-on testing against actual agency recruiting requirements.
Applicant tracking systems for staffing agencies handle candidate management, client relationships, and placement workflows in a single platform. The category spans everything from lightweight tools that help a two-person boutique firm track candidates to enterprise systems that run payroll, billing, and compliance for 500-recruiter operations. “ATS for staffing agencies” means something different depending on whether you fill three executive roles a month or 300 light industrial shifts a week.
Dual ATS and CRM functionality. Staffing agencies sell to two audiences: candidates and clients. I tested whether each platform could manage both pipelines without forcing recruiters to switch between separate tools or maintain parallel spreadsheets. Systems that unified candidate tracking with client relationship management and job order workflows scored highest.
Resume parsing and candidate matching. I uploaded the same batch of 50 resumes - a mix of clean Word documents, messy PDFs, and LinkedIn exports - into every platform. Parsing accuracy varied wildly. Some extracted skills, work history, and contact details cleanly. Others mangled formatting or missed entire employment sections.
Can you actually run your agency on it? Back-office features like placement tracking, commission splits, and client billing integration separate staffing-specific platforms from corporate ATS tools wearing an agency costume. I evaluated whether each system could track a placement from initial client intake through candidate submission to start date confirmation.
Integration depth. Agencies run on stacks - background check providers, skills testing platforms, VMS tools, job boards. I looked at the breadth of native integrations, API accessibility, and whether connecting third-party tools required expensive middleware.
Speed of daily workflows. Recruiters live inside their ATS eight hours a day. I timed common actions: adding a candidate from LinkedIn, submitting a candidate to a client, scheduling an interview, and logging a placement. Platforms where those actions took fewer clicks and less context-switching ranked higher.
Each platform received the same test scenario: a staffing agency with three active clients, 15 open job orders across temp and direct-hire, and a candidate pool of 200 profiles. I processed full placement cycles, tested candidate submission workflows, and measured how quickly a new recruiter could complete basic tasks without training.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for SMB Recruiting
Breezy HR
Pros
- Kanban pipeline requires zero training to understand
- Unlimited candidate storage on all paid plans
- One-click syndication to 50+ job boards
- Built-in asynchronous video interviewing
Cons
- Per-position pricing scales badly for high-volume agencies
- Customer support is slow on lower-tier plans
- Resume parsing chokes on complex PDF layouts
If your agency runs fewer than 50 open roles and your recruiters have never used an ATS before, Breezy HR is where you start. The Kanban-style pipeline displays candidates as cards you drag between stages - applied, phone screen, interview, offer - and each drag triggers whatever automated action you have configured. Rejection emails, scorecard prompts, team notifications. I had a new test user processing candidates within 10 minutes of their first login, with no walkthrough.
The one-click job posting syndication pushed a single listing to Indeed, LinkedIn, Glassdoor, and 47 other boards simultaneously. I did not have to reformat the description or create separate accounts. Breezy also includes native video interviewing - candidates record asynchronous responses to preset questions, and the hiring team reviews them on their own schedule. For a small agency juggling client calls and candidate screens, that asynchronous layer saves real time.
Pricing is the problem. Breezy charges per active position, not per recruiter or per candidate. A three-person agency with 40 open roles pays substantially more than one with 10, regardless of how many placements they close. The free plan limits you to a single active position, which is useless for any real agency workflow. Advanced reporting and custom scorecards live behind the Growth plan at $249 per month. The mobile app works for checking candidate status but lacks the full functionality of the desktop experience.
For small agencies or in-house teams managing a moderate number of roles, Breezy delivers the fastest path from zero to functional ATS. Agencies doing high-volume temp staffing will outgrow the pricing model fast.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Staffing Agencies
Bullhorn
Pros
- Unified ATS and CRM eliminates parallel systems
- Over 100 pre-integrated partners for background checks, billing, and sourcing
- Email parsing creates candidate records without leaving your inbox
Cons
- Severe lag and slow load times during peak usage
- Reporting customization requires expensive tier upgrades
- Customer support is frequently described as unhelpful for complex issues
- Mobile app lacks desktop parity
Bullhorn is the default choice for large staffing agencies, and there is a reason it dominates the market even though nobody seems to love using it. The platform unifies candidate tracking, client relationship management, job order processing, and sales pipeline visibility in a single database. A recruiter can go from sourcing a candidate on LinkedIn to submitting them to a client to logging the placement without switching tools. That consolidation matters when you have 50 recruiters who would otherwise maintain their own spreadsheets.
I tested the email integration by forwarding 20 candidate resumes from my inbox. Bullhorn parsed 17 of them correctly, creating candidate records with extracted contact details, work history, and skills tags. The three failures were PDFs with heavy graphic formatting. The inbox productivity tools let recruiters create tasks, update candidate statuses, and log client interactions without opening the main application - a workflow that saves measurable time when you process hundreds of emails daily.
The integration marketplace is massive. Background check providers, VMS platforms, onboarding tools, payroll systems - Bullhorn connects to most of them natively. I counted 112 listed partners in the marketplace. For agencies that have already built a tech stack around specific vendors, Bullhorn is likely compatible.
Performance is the persistent complaint. During my testing, page loads averaged 3-4 seconds, and running a filtered search across a large candidate database occasionally timed out. The mobile app feels like a stripped-down afterthought rather than a genuine companion to the desktop experience. Pricing is opaque - Bullhorn does not publish rates, and the quote process involves negotiation that favors larger firms. For agencies with 20+ recruiters who need a centralized, extensible platform and can tolerate the rough edges, Bullhorn remains the industry standard. Smaller firms will find better value elsewhere.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Agency CRM + ATS
Crelate
Pros
- Visual drag-and-drop pipeline builder is fast to learn
- Client portals provide a polished candidate presentation layer
- Chrome extension parses LinkedIn profiles directly into the system
Cons
- Boolean search slows down on complex queries
- Duplicate detection is inconsistent
- Newer features sometimes feel incomplete at launch
A five-person executive search firm needs different things from their software than a 200-recruiter temp agency. Crelate understands that distinction. The platform combines ATS functionality with a genuine agency CRM, handling business development pipelines alongside candidate tracking without forcing you into an enterprise-scale tool designed for firms ten times your size.
I built custom hiring stages using the visual pipeline editor - drag a stage, name it, assign automated actions. The whole setup took 12 minutes for a seven-stage executive search workflow. Client portals let you share a curated shortlist with a hiring manager through a branded interface rather than emailing resumes as attachments. The portal tracks which candidates the client views and how long they spend on each profile, giving recruiters real intelligence on client preferences.
The Chrome extension for LinkedIn sourcing pulled candidate data cleanly in my tests, populating name, current title, employment history, and contact information into Crelate with a single click. Built-in texting and email sequencing handle outreach without switching to a separate tool. For a mid-sized direct placement firm doing executive search or specialized recruiting, these features cover the full workflow.
Scaling is where Crelate strains. Complex Boolean searches across large databases slow noticeably, and the duplicate detection flagged false positives more often than it caught actual duplicates in my 200-candidate test pool. Advanced features and meaningful storage increases require the Enterprise tier. For agencies in the 5-to-50 recruiter range doing direct placement or executive search, Crelate hits a strong middle ground between Bullhorn’s complexity and Breezy’s simplicity.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Agency Staffing
JobAdder
Pros
- One of the most intuitive interfaces in the ATS market
- Mobile app includes voice-to-text note dictation
- 150+ integrations via open API
- Customer support is responsive during implementation
Cons
- Reporting lacks the drill-down depth of competitors
- Long-term users report slow feature development
If your recruiters spend half their day in client meetings and the other half in the car, JobAdder was designed for them. The mobile app is not a checkbox feature - it includes voice-to-text note dictation, candidate review, and status updates that work reliably on a phone screen. I dictated interview feedback while walking between meetings, and the transcription was accurate enough to post directly to the candidate record without editing.
JobAdder blends ATS and CRM in a layout that agency recruiters pick up quickly. I watched a test user with no prior ATS experience navigate from candidate search to client submission in under four minutes on their first attempt. The interface is cleaner than Bullhorn’s and less cluttered than PCRecruiter’s, which matters when you are training new hires who need to be productive in their first week.
The integration marketplace lists over 150 partners, and the open API makes custom connections straightforward. Background check providers, skills assessments, job boards - the connections work without middleware for most common tools.
Reporting is the weak spot. Dashboard views cover the basics - placements, pipeline stages, activity metrics - but lack the granular drill-down that data-focused managers want. You cannot build the kind of custom source-attribution reports that Greenhouse or Ashby offer. Feature development has also been slow; several long-term users I spoke with mentioned that core functionality has not changed meaningfully in years. For agencies that value usability and mobile access over advanced analytics, JobAdder delivers.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Front-to-Back Office
Avionte
Pros
- Combines ATS, CRM, payroll, and billing in a single platform
- Handles high-volume temp placement and shift scheduling
- Mass communication tools reach large candidate pools fast
Cons
- Implementation is notoriously difficult and lengthy
- Interface feels dated compared to modern SaaS tools
- Performance issues and bugs are a recurring complaint
- No free trial or transparent pricing
Most ATS platforms stop at the offer letter. Avionte keeps going through payroll, billing, and back-office operations - and that end-to-end coverage is the reason high-volume staffing agencies tolerate its rough edges. When a light industrial staffing firm needs to place 50 warehouse workers by Monday, process their timesheets on Friday, run payroll the following week, and invoice the client the day after, Avionte handles the entire chain without exporting data to a separate system.
I tested the shift scheduling module with a simulated 40-person warehouse crew. Assigning workers to shifts, sending mass text notifications about open slots, and tracking confirmations all happened within the platform. The mass communication tools reached the full candidate pool in under two minutes. Configurable workflows accommodate different branch offices with different specializations - a healthcare staffing branch and a light industrial branch can run distinct processes within the same system.
Implementation is brutal. Multiple users I consulted described months-long onboarding processes with missed deadlines and inadequate training materials. The web-based interface lags behind the legacy server platform in feature parity, and the UI looks like it was designed before responsive web standards existed. Customizations require paid support interventions.
For large, multi-branch staffing agencies doing high-volume temporary placements, Avionte consolidates what would otherwise be four or five separate tools. For anyone else, the implementation cost and interface friction make it a poor fit.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Staffing Automation
PCRecruiter
Pros
- Database search power that handles millions of records
- Nearly every field, form, and workflow is customizable
- Customer support is knowledgeable and reliable
Cons
- Interface looks and feels like early-2000s software
- Steep learning curve overwhelms new recruiters
- Requires 1-2 year contracts with setup fees
When I ran a complex Boolean search across a test database of 10,000 candidate records - filtering by three skills, two locations, and availability within 30 days - PCRecruiter returned results in under two seconds. Running the same query structure in three other platforms either timed out or required simplifying the search string. For agencies sitting on massive legacy talent pools built over decades, that search performance is not optional. It is the product.
PCRecruiter lets you customize essentially everything. Fields, screens, pipeline stages, automated sequences, reporting templates - the platform bends to fit whatever internal process your agency has developed over the years. The PCR Capture browser extension pulls candidate data from LinkedIn and other sites into the system cleanly. Built-in email sequencing automates outreach without requiring a separate tool.
The price of all that power is the interface. PCRecruiter looks old. Navigation menus are nested three levels deep, icons are small, and new recruiters need weeks of training before they stop accidentally creating duplicate records. The platform requires a long-term contract commitment, and integrations with newer, niche HR tools are limited compared to open-API platforms.
For established agencies with large databases and experienced recruiters who value search power over aesthetics, PCRecruiter delivers capability that modern competitors have not matched.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for AI Sourcing
Manatal
Pros
- Chrome extension imports LinkedIn profiles with enriched data
- AI match scoring ranks applicants against job descriptions
- Pricing starts at $15 per month with clear tiers
Cons
- Limited customization for advanced agency workflows
- No native candidate self-scheduling
- SSO and API access locked behind the highest tier
Manatal costs less per month than most platforms on this list charge per user. At $15 per month for the base tier, a three-person agency can run a functional ATS with AI-powered candidate matching for less than a team lunch. The pricing transparency alone distinguishes it from every enterprise competitor that hides rates behind a “contact sales” button.
The People-Match Chrome extension is the standout sourcing tool. I tested it on 30 LinkedIn profiles, and it pulled name, current title, employment history, skills, and contact information into Manatal with a single click. The extension also enriches profiles with data from other social platforms when available. AI match scoring then ranks imported candidates against active job descriptions, surfacing the strongest fits automatically. For agencies that rely heavily on LinkedIn headhunting, this workflow eliminates the manual copy-paste cycle.
Where Manatal falls short is depth. Workflow customization is limited compared to Crelate or Bullhorn - you get predefined pipeline stages with minor tweaks, not a visual builder. Onboarding features are basic. Candidates cannot self-schedule interviews through the platform. Advanced features like single sign-on and full API access require the Enterprise tier, which jumps significantly in price.
For small agencies and SMB in-house teams that need an affordable, modern ATS with strong sourcing tools, Manatal is the best value available.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Structured Hiring
Greenhouse
Pros
- Structured scorecards force consistent candidate evaluation
- Analytics cover source attribution, DEI funnels, and time-to-fill
- Over 1,000 integrations in the marketplace
- Anonymous resume review reduces bias
Cons
- One of the most expensive ATS options available
- Structured process creates friction for quick hires
- Implementation demands significant planning time
Greenhouse does not let you wing it. Before posting a job, the platform requires you to define interview stages, build evaluation scorecards, and assign interviewers with specific competencies to assess. This structured approach is deliberate - it forces hiring consistency across every role and interviewer, and the data it produces is the best in the ATS market.
I built a scorecard for a senior recruiter role with five competency areas. Every interviewer who evaluated a candidate scored them on the same rubric, and the system flagged score discrepancies automatically. The DEI funnel reporting tracked candidate progression by demographic group at each pipeline stage - data that most competitors either lack entirely or bury in a premium add-on. Source attribution showed exactly which job boards and referral channels produced candidates who actually reached the offer stage, not just which ones generated the most applications.
The integration marketplace lists over 1,000 partners. I connected background check, skills assessment, and scheduling tools without writing any code or using middleware. For agencies that work with enterprise clients demanding compliance documentation and structured processes, Greenhouse provides the framework those clients expect.
Pricing is steep and opaque. Add-on modules for sourcing, onboarding, and advanced analytics stack on top of an already high base cost. The structured workflow also slows things down - if a client calls with an urgent backfill and you need a candidate submitted by end of day, Greenhouse’s required setup steps feel like bureaucracy. For agencies serving enterprise clients who value process rigor and data, Greenhouse is the right tool. For high-speed staffing work, it is over-engineered.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for CRM & ATS
Lever
Pros
- Treats sourced candidates and applicants in one unified pipeline
- Modern UI that hiring managers actually adopt
- Built-in anonymous resume review for DEI
Cons
- Expensive, especially for smaller teams
- Reporting is clunky when pulling large data sets
- High fees for API access limit integration flexibility
- No native onboarding module
Lever calls itself a Talent Relationship Management platform, and the distinction from a standard ATS matters. Sourced candidates and inbound applicants live in the same pipeline rather than in separate databases. A recruiter can nurture a passive candidate through email sequences, then move them into an active application flow without creating a duplicate record or switching tools. I tested this by adding 20 candidates via the sourcing extension and 30 via a job posting - all 50 appeared in a single unified view with full interaction history.
The interface is clean enough that hiring managers use it willingly. That sounds like a low bar, but recruiter-facing tools are notorious for adoption problems among non-recruiting staff. I watched a test hiring manager navigate from job opening to candidate review to scorecard submission without any guidance. Anonymous resume review strips names, gender indicators, and university names from applications to reduce unconscious bias - a feature that enterprise clients increasingly require.
Lever’s weaknesses center on cost and depth. Pricing is high and not published. API access - critical for agencies integrating with VMS platforms, billing tools, and client systems - carries additional fees that make custom integrations expensive. Reporting works for standard metrics but struggles with large data exports. There is no native onboarding module, so you need a separate tool to handle everything after the offer letter.
For mid-market agencies and in-house teams that want sourcing and applicant tracking unified in one modern interface, Lever delivers. Agencies needing deep back-office integrations or high-volume temp workflows will find the limitations frustrating.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Startups
Ashby
Pros
- Analytics dashboards are highly customizable
- Scheduling automation handles complex interview panels
- Native sourcing tools with Chrome extension and outreach sequences
Cons
- Steep learning curve from the volume of configuration options
- Basic tasks sometimes require too many clicks
- Advanced analytics require a separate paid add-on
Ashby’s analytics are the reason data-focused recruiting teams switch to it from Greenhouse or Lever. I built a custom dashboard tracking time-to-fill by source channel, candidate-to-interview conversion rates, and interviewer scoring consistency - all in about 15 minutes using pre-built templates. The reporting depth rivals dedicated BI tools, and the data updates in real time rather than requiring overnight batch processing.
The platform consolidates ATS, CRM, and scheduling into one system. Native sourcing via Chrome extension and automated outreach sequences eliminate the need for a separate tool like Gem or hireEZ. Interview scheduling handled a five-person panel with cross-timezone availability in a single automated sequence during my testing. An AI notetaker joins calls and generates structured summaries grouped by competency.
Configuration is where new users struggle. Ashby offers so many customization options that initial setup feels overwhelming. Simple actions like moving a candidate between stages required more clicks than equivalent actions in JobAdder or Breezy. The analytics module that makes Ashby special is a paid add-on, not included in the base subscription. Sourcing email lookups come with monthly caps.
For tech startups and scaling companies that treat recruiting as a data problem, Ashby provides the strongest analytics foundation available. Agencies needing quick deployment or minimal training overhead should look at simpler tools.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Sourcing
Dover ATS
Pros
- Core ATS is completely free with unlimited jobs and users
- AI candidate rescoring adapts as job criteria evolve
- Career page builder deploys in minutes
Cons
- No client management or agency CRM features
- Third-party integrations are limited
- Monetization pushes you toward their paid recruiter marketplace
Dover’s core ATS costs nothing. Unlimited jobs, unlimited users, unlimited candidate tracking - free. I created 10 job postings, invited three team members, and processed 50 candidate applications without hitting a paywall or a usage cap. The catch is that Dover monetizes through its embedded recruiter marketplace, offering access to vetted hourly recruiters for teams that need extra sourcing capacity.
AI candidate rescoring is the interesting technical feature. As I adjusted the requirements for a test role - adding a new skill, removing a location preference - Dover automatically re-ranked the existing applicant pool against the updated criteria. Candidates who scored low initially surfaced higher after the criteria shift, without me manually re-reviewing each one. The career page builder generated a branded page in under five minutes.
Dover was built for startups hiring internally, not for staffing agencies. There is no client management, no job order tracking, no candidate submission workflow, and no billing integration. The integration ecosystem is thin compared to established competitors. Advanced customization is restricted within the free tier.
For early-stage startups that need to organize their hiring before they can justify paying for software, Dover eliminates the budget objection entirely. Staffing agencies should not consider it - the client-facing functionality does not exist.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for In-House Recruitment
Pinpoint
Pros
- Flat-fee pricing with unlimited jobs, candidates, and users
- Blind hiring mode strips identifying information from resumes
- Includes a full onboarding module
- Dedicated agency portal for external recruiter submissions
Cons
- Base fee starts around $600 per month
- Reporting dashboards lack drag-and-drop customization
Pinpoint charges one flat fee. No per-user charges, no per-job charges, no candidate storage limits. I added 15 test users, posted 25 jobs, and imported 200 candidates without the price changing. For a company that hires in unpredictable bursts - 30 roles this quarter, five the next - that pricing model removes the cost anxiety that per-seat platforms create.
Blind hiring mode automatically redacts candidate names, gender indicators, and university names from applications before reviewers see them. I tested it with a batch of 20 resumes, and the redaction was thorough - no identifying details leaked through. The dedicated agency portal gives external recruiters a separate login to submit candidates directly, eliminating the email chains and spreadsheet tracking that typically accompany agency relationships.
Pinpoint also includes an onboarding module, which most ATS platforms treat as a separate purchase. New hire document collection, task assignments, and welcome workflows are built in. Reporting covers the fundamentals - pipeline metrics, source tracking, time-to-fill - but the dashboards cannot be customized with drag-and-drop widgets.
For growing in-house teams that want predictable costs and clean DEI tooling, Pinpoint delivers. The $600 monthly minimum makes it expensive for very small companies, and the lack of client CRM features means agencies should look elsewhere.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for Employer Branding
Teamtailor
Pros
- Career site builder produces genuinely attractive pages without code
- Live chat widget captures passive candidates on the careers page
- Co-Pilot AI generates job descriptions and interview questions
Cons
- Candidate database search is basic
- Integration ecosystem is smaller than Greenhouse or Bullhorn
- Not built for bulk hiring actions
I built a complete career site in Teamtailor in 25 minutes using the drag-and-drop editor. No code, no design team, no template that looked like every other company’s careers page. The builder offers enough layout flexibility that the result looked custom-built. For startups and mid-sized companies competing for talent against bigger brands, the visual quality of the candidate-facing experience is a real differentiator.
The live chat widget sits on the career site and lets prospective candidates ask questions before committing to an application. During my test, simulated candidate inquiries received responses in the same window - no redirect to email, no “we will get back to you” delay. Co-Pilot AI generates first-draft job descriptions, rejection emails, and structured interview questions. The output needed editing but saved 15-20 minutes per job posting compared to writing from scratch.
Candidate database search is limited. Boolean queries are basic, and filtering a large pool by multiple criteria simultaneously felt clumsy compared to PCRecruiter or Bullhorn. The integration marketplace is smaller than enterprise competitors. Bulk actions - rejecting 50 candidates at once, mass-scheduling interviews - are either slow or absent.
For companies where employer branding and candidate experience drive hiring success, Teamtailor builds the best front door in the ATS market. For high-volume staffing agencies that need database power and bulk workflows, it is the wrong tool.
Best Applicant Tracking Systems for AI Notes
Metaview
Pros
- AI notes are structured by competency, not just timestamps
- ATS integrations with Greenhouse, Lever, and Ashby work flawlessly
- Interviewers maintain eye contact instead of typing
Cons
- Not a standalone ATS - requires a separate core platform
- Per-user pricing gets expensive for large teams
- Struggles with heavy accents and overlapping speakers
Metaview is not an applicant tracking system. It is an AI interview assistant that plugs into your existing ATS and eliminates the note-taking problem that plagues high-volume recruiting. The bot joins video calls silently, records the conversation, and produces structured summaries grouped by the competencies you defined in advance - not just a raw transcript with timestamps.
I ran five test interviews with Metaview connected to a Greenhouse instance. After each call, structured notes appeared in the candidate’s Greenhouse profile within three minutes. The summaries captured key responses organized under headings like “Technical Problem Solving” and “Team Collaboration” rather than a chronological dump of everything said. Interviewers reported feeling more present in conversations because they were not dividing attention between the candidate and their keyboard.
Accuracy was strong for clear audio with a single speaker. When two people talked simultaneously or when a candidate had a heavy accent, the transcription degraded noticeably and required manual corrections. Per-user pricing at $50-60 per month makes Metaview expensive if you deploy it across a 30-person recruiting team that does not all interview daily.
For agencies and in-house teams running high-volume interviews where consistent evaluation matters, Metaview saves hours of manual documentation weekly. It requires a separate ATS to function, so factor the combined cost into your decision.
Which ATS fits your agency?
The split in this market is clear. Platforms like Bullhorn, Avionte, and PCRecruiter were built specifically for staffing agencies - they handle client relationships, job orders, placements, and in some cases payroll and billing. Tools like Greenhouse, Lever, and Ashby were built for in-house corporate hiring and adapted for agency use with varying success. Knowing which side of that divide your agency falls on eliminates half the list immediately.
If you run a high-volume temp staffing operation, start with Bullhorn or Avionte and accept the implementation cost. If you do direct placement or executive search with fewer than 50 recruiters, Crelate and JobAdder offer the CRM-plus-ATS combination without the enterprise overhead. Most platforms on this list offer free trials or demo environments - use them with your actual workflows, not a sales team’s curated walkthrough.