Skills in context
Not just skill tags — the work each candidate actually described, aligned so you can weigh depth against depth.
After a good search you have five plausible people and a decision to make. Compare puts shortlisted candidates next to each other — skills, experience, availability, and honest match scores — so the tradeoffs are visible instead of remembered.
Search narrows hundreds to a handful. Compare narrows a handful to a decision.
Most sourcing tools stop at the results list, leaving the final comparison to browser tabs and gut feel. That is where hiring decisions actually degrade: by the fifth profile you are comparing your memory of candidate one with your impression of candidate five. A structured side-by-side view keeps every finalist's evidence in front of you at once.
Compare works directly on your shortlists — the same ones you build from plain-English search and manage through your own pipeline stages.
Not just skill tags — the work each candidate actually described, aligned so you can weigh depth against depth.
Each candidate's fit score against your search, ranked by relevance alone. Nobody pays to look better here.
Who is actually reachable for this role, on what timeline, with what work setup — visible before you invest in outreach.
AI compare highlights where finalists genuinely differ — the deltas that matter for the role, not a generic summary.
AI compare is included on Growth and Team plans. Starter includes search, shortlists, reveals, and messaging. See pricing for the full matrix.
No. Compare is a decision view over your shortlist. Search ranking stays honest and fit-based everywhere in the product.
Shortlists live in your workspace, so teammates with seats work from the same pipeline and the same evidence.
Growth and Team plans include CSV export for shortlists and search results.
Search, shortlist, compare, message — one workspace from brief to hire.