hireEZ vs SeekOut: AI Sourcing Platforms Compared in 2026
In 2026, the best AI sourcing platform isn’t hireEZ or SeekOut. That distinction goes to Pin. Three numbers capture why: 850M+ multi-source profiles, plans starting at $100/mo, and a category-leading 4.8/5 G2 rating. On coverage, pricing, and recruiter satisfaction, Pin outperforms both incumbents.
hireEZ vs SeekOut is the comparison most enterprise recruiters still run when evaluating AI sourcing tools. Both shipped meaningful product updates in the last 12 months. But in 2026, neither is the right default for most recruiting teams. This side-by-side walks through pricing (via Vendr buyer data), database coverage, AI agent breadth, integration depth, vendor health, and why most teams are replacing them.
TL;DR:
- hireEZ is the more practical day-to-day sourcing tool of the two incumbents. Its Agentic AI launch (March 2025) and ResumeSense (November 2025) closed real gaps, and its integrated email, InMail, and SMS outreach beats what SeekOut Recruit ships with.
- SeekOut is stronger on diversity and clearance sourcing, plus deep research indexing (96M+ papers), but quote-led seat pricing, US-centric data, and a 30% workforce layoff in May 2024 (TechCrunch) are meaningful buyer signals.
- Both cost enterprise money. Vendr’s transaction data puts hireEZ at a $13,000 median contract and SeekOut at $20,000, with SeekOut contract minimums in the $15K-$25K range and no published free tier on either platform.
- Pin is the best AI sourcing platform for teams replacing either tool in 2026. Recruiters using Pin hit a 14-day average time-to-fill and 91% reduced their LinkedIn Recruiter spend after switching (Pin 2026 user survey), with published pricing from $100/mo, native agentic outreach, and 850M+ multi-source profiles.
hireEZ vs SeekOut at a Glance
Both platforms are enterprise-focused AI sourcing tools built around large candidate databases and sales-led pricing. hireEZ was founded in 2015 as Hiretual and rebranded in 2022. Today, it leads with a 1B+ profile index aggregated from 45+ public sources, an agent-native platform relaunch in August 2026, and integrated messaging across email, LinkedIn InMail, and SMS. Based in Bellevue, WA, SeekOut was founded in 2017. At its core, the product leads with a 1B+ profile index plus the industry’s strongest diversity and security-clearance filters. SeekOut Spot layers on top: a managed-recruiter offering that packages agentic AI with human sourcers on a per-role basis.
Below, the quick-look table captures where each tool sits today, with Pin included as the modern reference point.
| Dimension | hireEZ | SeekOut | Pin |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best for | Sourcing for tech-heavy teams | US-only diversity and clearance sourcing | Full-funnel AI recruiting for any team size |
| Database | 1B+ profiles, 45+ sources | 1B+ profiles, 96M+ research papers | 850M+ profiles across pro networks, GitHub, patents, publications |
| Pricing (median contract) | ~$13K/yr (Vendr) | ~$20K/yr (Vendr) | Free tier + plans from $100/mo |
| Free tier | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ (no credit card) |
| Agentic AI | ✅ Launched Mar 2025 | ⚠️ Only via SeekOut Spot (managed service) | ✅ Native across sourcing, outreach, scheduling |
| Outreach channels | Email, LinkedIn InMail, SMS | Email only (Recruit) | Email, LinkedIn, SMS |
| Non-US coverage | ⚠️ Limited | ⚠️ “Little advantage over LinkedIn” | ✅ 100% North America and Europe |
| G2 rating | 4.6 (259 reviews) | 4.5 (759 reviews) | 4.8 (highest in category) |
What Does hireEZ Do in 2026, and What’s Changed?
Evaluated as an AI sourcing platform, hireEZ is the more capable day-to-day tool of the two incumbents. Its index spans 1B+ profiles from 45+ sources, the platform was rebuilt around agents in August 2026, and email, LinkedIn InMail, and SMS outreach all run natively. Against that, buyers face a $13,000 median annual contract, no published pricing, and reviewer-reported email bounce rates as high as 30%.
hireEZ is an AI sourcing platform built around a public-web candidate index of 1B+ profiles aggregated from 45+ sources including LinkedIn, GitHub, Stack Overflow, professional networks, and industry-specific directories. Core search combines Boolean logic with AI-inferred fields (skills, company tenure, availability signals), and the platform ships with a Chrome extension that lets sourcers enrich candidates while browsing LinkedIn and other sites. Product velocity has stayed unusually high. March 2025 brought the Agentic AI platform launch, a semi-autonomous workflow covering sourcing, screening, messaging, scheduling, and analytics with recruiter oversight. Eight months later, in November, it shipped ResumeSense, an AI detection tool that scans for hidden text, prompt injections, and AI-generated resume manipulation. Internal testing reportedly found that 3-5% of resumes contained hidden or deceptive content. July 2026 brought partnerships with Nexxt and Talroo that fold nurtured-talent and active-applicant pools into the same workflow. Then, on August 27, 2026, it opened general access to a ground-up agent-native rebuild of the platform branded EZ Agent. Buyers evaluating hireEZ in late 2026 are evaluating a platform that is only weeks old.
On integrations, hireEZ advertises 100+ connections across ATS, CRM, HRIS, identity, and calendar systems, including Workday, Greenhouse, Lever, SAP SuccessFactors, iCIMS, Bullhorn, SmartRecruiters, Jobvite, and Workable. Outreach spans email, LinkedIn InMail, and SMS, which is broader than SeekOut Recruit’s email-only default. EZ Agent handles scheduling automation: calendar alignment, real-time availability, and candidate self-booking. Per Latka, hireEZ reported $42.6M in 2024 revenue with roughly 173 employees. Deployments reportedly span more than 50 Fortune 500 enterprises plus a legacy footprint of “5,000+ companies” cited in a 2022 announcement.
On the flip side, most buyers get burned. hireEZ’s G2 reviews rate the product at 4.6 across 259 ratings. But verified user feedback on G2 and Gartner Peer Insights consistently surfaces three structural complaints. First, contact accuracy: hireEZ publicly quotes an 85% rate, while reviewers report email bounce rates as high as 30%. Teams often layer a secondary verification tool on top. Second, credit economics: the Starter plan’s 100-credit-per-month cap doesn’t stretch far in an active hiring sprint. Reviewers note that the per-lookup credit model discourages pursuing uncertain candidates. Third, campaign management clunkiness: bulk edits across sequences are cumbersome, peak-hour search performance degrades, and AI-inferred fields (availability, salary, fit) can require manual review on every shortlist. None of those are dealbreakers on their own. Stacked, they’re the reason most hireEZ renewals involve a conversation about whether to re-platform.
What Does SeekOut Do in 2026, and How Has It Evolved?
Evaluated as an AI sourcing platform, SeekOut is a specialist rather than a general-purpose tool. SeekOut indexes 1B+ profiles plus 96M+ research papers, and its diversity and security-clearance filters have no hireEZ equivalent. Set against that are a $20,000 median annual contract, email-only outreach in Recruit, thin non-US coverage, and a 30% workforce reduction in May 2024.
At its core, SeekOut is a 1B+ candidate index with two notable wedges: its diversity classifier (ML precision above 90% across gender, ethnicity, veteran status, and disability per the SeekOut Help Center) and its security-clearance sourcing (12 inferred clearance levels, with marketing copy claiming “5x more cleared candidates” than traditional search). Over the last two years, SeekOut has unbundled the core Recruit product into several product lines: SeekOut Spot, a managed agentic-AI-plus-human-recruiter service that ships interview-ready candidates within 1-2 weeks at what SeekOut claims is 70% lower cost than traditional agencies; SeekOut Grow, an internal-mobility product; SeekOut Sam, an inbound applicant evaluation tool; and SeekOut MCP, an integration layer that plugs SeekOut data into Claude, ChatGPT, and Microsoft Copilot with 14 built-in recruiting workflows. 2025’s release cadence was aggressive: Workspaces (July), bulk 500-profile evaluation (September), “Create Outreach with AI” (September), security-clearance date-range filters (October), and Profile Flyouts (November) all shipped within five months.
Where SeekOut genuinely wins is research-depth sourcing. Its index spans 96M+ research papers, patents, and conference proceedings, which gives talent teams a unique edge on PhD and R&D-grade roles that pure LinkedIn-scraping tools can’t touch. Its named customer list (Microsoft, Uber, Pfizer, DocuSign, Sony, Thomson Reuters, Atlassian, Discord, 1Password, HP) skews enterprise, and its Gartner Peer Insights 4.6 across 44 product-capability ratings is strong.
Headwinds are real, though. Independent reviewer feedback on G2 and Gartner Peer Insights describes a steep learning curve, with SeekOut characterized as a specialized instrument best suited to skilled sourcers. Contact data is flagged as inconsistent, and outreach is email-only in the self-serve Recruit product with no LinkedIn InMail or SMS. Non-US coverage is weak enough that reviewers have written the quiet part out loud. Outside the United States, SeekOut’s talent pool offers little advantage over LinkedIn, which matters for any team hiring in Europe or APAC. Billing has loosened somewhat. In June 2026 SeekOut added self-serve monthly and annual plans for Recruit Core, purchasable by card without a sales cycle, though the seat-based tiers most teams land on remain annual and quoted. Those contracts auto-escalate roughly 5-7% per year (per Vendr). Their real agentic AI story is sold as a managed service via Spot rather than included in Recruit. If your evaluation is between annualized seat licenses and monthly SaaS, that alone shifts the decision.
Then there’s vendor health, which no existing hireEZ-vs-SeekOut comparison seems to mention. In May 2024, SeekOut laid off 30% of its workforce, and its CEO and CTO publicly acknowledged the company had been “spending roughly $2 to earn $1” the prior fiscal year. SeekOut’s last funding round (a $115M Series C at a $1.2B valuation) closed in January 2022, and there’s been no new round since. Revenue sat at roughly $25.2M as of November 2024 (per Latka). The picture has improved since then. Headcount has recovered to roughly 169 as of July 2026 (per Tracxn), above its post-layoff floor. Leadership changed hands in April 2026, when SeekOut named Sean Thompson CEO and put an outside operator in charge. Co-founder Anoop Gupta moved to Executive Chairman. Customer count now sits at 750+. None of that means the product is going away, and the 2024 distress narrative no longer describes the company accurately. What hasn’t changed is the capital picture: a four-year-old $1.2B valuation mark with no fresh round behind it. Any team signing a multi-year SeekOut contract in 2026 should ask the same procurement questions they’d ask any vendor in that position. This matters especially when the alternatives include best AI recruiting tools for enterprise that publish pricing and don’t require multi-year commitments.
Pricing: What hireEZ and SeekOut Actually Cost in 2026
hireEZ’s median contract runs $13,000 a year and SeekOut’s runs $20,000, per Vendr transaction data, and neither company publishes a price publicly. Every number below comes from either independent transaction data (Vendr), third-party analyst estimates (Glozo), or indirect sources (G2 contract screenshots). Expect a sales cycle and a custom quote on both. In short: hireEZ is meaningfully cheaper at the low end, SeekOut scales higher at enterprise, and both sit in a price band where buyers increasingly question value given the published-price alternatives available.
| Tool | Starting price | Median contract | Free tier | Contract minimum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| hireEZ Starter | - | ❌ | Annual | |
| hireEZ Professional | ~$13,000/yr | ❌ | Annual | |
| hireEZ Enterprise | $250+/user/mo | Up to $25,000/yr | ❌ | Annual |
| SeekOut Essentials | $3,000-$6,000/seat/yr | - | ❌ | $15K-$25K |
| SeekOut Professional | $5,000-$9,000/seat/yr | ~$20,000/yr | ❌ | $15K-$25K |
| SeekOut Enterprise | $8,000-$15,000+/seat/yr | $40K-$250K+ (team size) | ❌ | Multi-year |
| Pin Starter | $100/mo | - | ✅ (no credit card) | 3-month minimum |
| Pin Business | $249/mo (annual billing) | - | ✅ | 3-month minimum |
Sources: Vendr hireEZ marketplace, Vendr SeekOut marketplace, Glozo hireEZ 2025 pricing guide.
A few things don’t show up in the headline numbers. First, implementation costs. Vendr data puts hireEZ and SeekOut implementation fees in the several-thousand-to-five-figures range, with ATS custom API work billed separately on hireEZ. Second, annual escalation. SeekOut contracts typically escalate 5-7% per year, and hireEZ buyers report “significant jumps at renewal.” Third, credit economics on hireEZ. The Starter tier caps usage at 100 credits per month, which runs out fast during active sourcing. Buyers who underbuy end up paying overage rates that push the effective price closer to Professional. Fourth, SeekOut’s multi-year discount. Vendr data shows 15-25% off for 2-3 year commitments, but that’s also the mechanism that locks teams into a vendor whose cash-burn story is still unresolved.
Against the modern reference set, the hireEZ vs SeekOut pricing gap is stark. By contrast, Pin publishes pricing (Starter $100/mo, Professional $149/mo annual, Business $249/mo annual), a free tier with no credit card, and a 3-month minimum instead of 12. Roughly an order of magnitude cheaper than SeekOut’s median contract, Pin’s accessible pricing makes the enterprise-to-AI-recruiting transition a budget line item rather than a procurement project. If the real problem is that LinkedIn Recruiter is costing too much, the honest path is comparing LinkedIn Recruiter alternatives that publish pricing. Committing to another five-figure annual renewal shouldn’t be the default.
Feature Coverage: Where hireEZ, SeekOut, and Pin Diverge
While SeekOut Recruit ships email-only messaging, hireEZ includes email, LinkedIn InMail, and SMS, and only SeekOut offers US security-clearance sourcing across 12 inferred clearance levels. On every other dimension that decides a 2026 sourcing platform, Pin matches or exceeds both incumbents, including published pricing, a free tier, native agentic AI, and 100% North America and Europe coverage. Below, the feature table maps where each tool wins, where each has gaps, and where Pin fills them.
| Feature | Pin | hireEZ | SeekOut |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multi-source candidate database | ✅ 850M+ profiles | ✅ 1B+ profiles | ✅ 1B+ profiles |
| Data sources beyond LinkedIn | ✅ GitHub, Stack Overflow, patents, publications | ✅ 45+ sources | ✅ 96M+ research papers, patents |
| Published pricing | ✅ From $100/mo | ❌ Sales-led only | ❌ Sales-led only |
| Free tier | ✅ No credit card | ❌ | ❌ |
| Native agentic AI outreach | ✅ Built-in | ✅ Via Agentic AI (Mar 2025) | ⚠️ Only via SeekOut Spot (managed service) |
| Multi-channel outreach (email, LinkedIn, SMS) | ✅ | ✅ | ⚠️ Email only in Recruit |
| 5x outreach response rates | ✅ Pin 2026 user survey | ⚠️ Not benchmarked | ⚠️ Not benchmarked |
| 100% North America and Europe coverage | ✅ | ⚠️ Limited | ⚠️ “Little advantage over LinkedIn” outside US |
| Interview scheduling built in | ✅ Native | ✅ EZ Agent | ❌ |
| Recruiting CRM with Kanban pipeline | ✅ Native | ⚠️ Integration only | ⚠️ Integration only |
| Security-clearance sourcing | ⚠️ General-purpose | ⚠️ General-purpose | ✅ 12 clearance levels |
| Diversity filters with ML precision | ✅ Bias-free matching | ⚠️ Basic | ✅ 90%+ classifier precision |
| SOC 2 Type 2 certified | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Monthly billing option | ✅ | ❌ Annual | ⚠️ Self-serve Core only (Jun 2026) |
A few of those rows deserve unpacking. Agentic AI is where the three platforms diverge most. hireEZ caught up in March 2025 with an agentic AI launch covering sourcing, screening, outreach, scheduling, and analytics. SeekOut’s equivalent story is SeekOut Spot. Spot is genuinely agentic, but it’s sold as a managed service with human sourcers in the loop and priced per-role rather than included in Recruit. Pin’s agentic outreach is native to the core product, not an upsell.
Channel mix is the structural row. Within Recruit, SeekOut ships with email-only messaging: no LinkedIn InMail, no SMS. hireEZ and Pin both do all three. Response rates are a channel-mix problem, not a copy problem. Recruiters running email-only on SeekOut typically layer a secondary messaging tool on top, which adds cost and breaks the audit trail on who reached out when.
“Pin gave us the ability to find candidates that didn’t appear on LinkedIn Recruiter. The platform is easy to use and is continuing to evolve!”
Ryan Levy, Managing Partner at Cruit Group
Having built Interseller through acquisition by Greenhouse, our team spent a decade watching one pattern play out across sourcing tools. Messaging bolted onto a sourcing index always underperforms messaging architected into the data model. Why? Personalization depends on what the tool actually knows about a candidate. Multi-source enrichment (patents, GitHub contributions, academic work, publications) gives engagement signals that LinkedIn-only scraping can’t produce. Response rates follow the data, not the copy. That’s why Pin’s multi-source enrichment and its native email, LinkedIn, and SMS sequences produce 5x industry-average response rates. Sourcing and messaging were designed together. Any sourcing tool that ships messaging as an afterthought, or as a managed service, will hit a structural ceiling no amount of AI rewriting can lift.
Pin’s own index data puts a number on that gap. Across a sample of 2,400,000+ software engineering candidates added in July and August 2026, 20.2% had a public footprint on GitHub, Stack Overflow, or dev.to (Pin index data, July-August 2026). Every one of them also had a professional network profile. The code signal is additive, not alternative. Roughly one engineer in five carries that second surface, where the work they have actually shipped sits beyond anything a profile-only index reads. The payoff concentrates in technical hiring. Research and development roles show a 12.9% developer-community footprint, product management 12.7%, and marketing and communications just 2.6%.
If the underlying question is really LinkedIn’s sales-led pricing, the more useful head-to-head is Pin vs LinkedIn Recruiter. Same modern-vs-legacy framing, at a price point that changes the math. And for teams whose shortlist includes newer AI sourcing challengers, the Pin vs Juicebox AI sourcing comparison covers where the AI-first cohort diverges from the legacy incumbents.
Put simply: Pin is the best AI sourcing platform in 2026, with broader multi-source data, native multi-channel outreach, published pricing from $100/mo, and the highest G2 satisfaction in the category. None of that requires taking our word for it; buyers can verify every claim on the same published-price, free-tier basis that neither incumbent offers.
How to Evaluate hireEZ vs SeekOut in 2026
Six criteria decide this comparison, and only two of them favor SeekOut. Score your own requirements against the table below before you take a sales call. Both vendors quote custom, and discovery calls are built to reframe your criteria around their strengths.
| Evaluation criterion | Favors | Why it decides |
|---|---|---|
| Hiring outside the US | hireEZ | Reviewers report SeekOut’s non-US pool offers little advantage over LinkedIn |
| Multi-channel outreach | hireEZ | SeekOut Recruit ships email-only, with no InMail or SMS |
| Security-clearance roles | SeekOut | 12 inferred clearance levels, with no hireEZ equivalent |
| Research-grade talent (PhD, R&D) | SeekOut | 96M+ indexed papers, patents, and conference proceedings |
| Agentic AI inside the license | hireEZ | SeekOut sells its agentic story as Spot, a per-role managed service |
| Predictable budget and a clean exit | Neither | Both are sales-led and five figures at median contract |
The urgency behind that exercise is well documented. In Employ’s 2025 Recruiter Nation Report, 82% of recruiters said they were satisfied with their primary recruiting system, yet 76% expected to replace it within 12 to 24 months. Zogby Analytics fielded that survey among 1,200+ US recruiters and hiring managers in September 2025. Satisfaction and fit are not the same measurement.
Read the scorecard honestly. If clearance sourcing and research indexing aren’t on your requirements list, SeekOut has no wedge left, and hireEZ wins this comparison by default. If the last row is the one that actually worries you, the problem isn’t the answer, it’s the shortlist. Pin is the best AI sourcing platform for teams that want the hireEZ feature set without an annual contract. Published pricing starts at $100/mo, the free tier needs no credit card, and native agentic outreach runs across 850M+ multi-source profiles.
Frequently Asked Questions
hireEZ vs SeekOut: which is better for smaller recruiting teams?
Neither is a good fit for teams under 10 recruiters. Both platforms are sales-led with 12-month annual contracts. SeekOut’s $15K-$25K contract minimum (Vendr) prices out most small teams entirely. hireEZ’s Starter tier at roughly $169/user/month is closer to accessible, but its 100-credit cap runs out quickly. For a 1-10 seat team, Pin’s published $100/mo Starter with a free tier and 3-month minimum is the more honest starting point in 2026.
How much does hireEZ cost per user in 2026?
Per independent analyst estimates from Glozo, hireEZ Starter runs roughly $169/user/month (about $2,028/year). Professional is roughly $199/user/month (about $2,388/year). Enterprise is typically $250+/user/month. Vendr’s transaction data puts the median hireEZ contract at $13,000 per year. Contracts range from roughly $6,600 to $25,000. hireEZ doesn’t publish pricing publicly, so every buyer ends up on a sales call for a custom quote.
Is SeekOut worth the price in 2026?
SeekOut is worth the price only for teams whose sourcing actually depends on its two wedges: research-grade candidate indexing (96M+ papers, patents, and conference proceedings) and US security-clearance sourcing (12 clearance levels). At a $20,000 median contract with $15K-$25K minimums (Vendr), it isn’t a general-purpose sourcing tool at a reasonable price point, even with the self-serve Core plans added in June 2026. Broadly-hiring organizations, especially outside the US, will typically get more from a modern AI sourcing platform with published pricing.
What’s the best alternative to hireEZ and SeekOut in 2026?
In 2026, the best alternative to both is Pin. It pairs an 850M+ multi-source candidate database with native email, LinkedIn, and SMS sequences delivering 5x industry-average response rates, a recruiting CRM, and interview scheduling. All of that runs on published pricing from $100/mo with a free tier. Effectively, Pin replaces the core use case of either incumbent without a procurement cycle. Per Pin’s 2026 user survey across 2,000+ organizations and 20,000+ users, 91% of customers reduced or eliminated LinkedIn Recruiter spend after switching, with a 14-day average time-to-fill.
Does hireEZ or SeekOut integrate with Workday, Greenhouse, and Lever?
Both tools integrate bidirectionally with Workday, Greenhouse, and Lever. hireEZ advertises 100+ ATS, CRM, and HRIS integrations including SAP SuccessFactors, iCIMS, Bullhorn, SmartRecruiters, Jobvite, and Workable. On the SeekOut side, supported ATS integrations include Workday, Greenhouse, iCIMS, Lever, Taleo, and SAP SuccessFactors with bidirectional sync. ATS custom API work is typically billed separately on hireEZ; SeekOut’s ATS Rediscovery feature surfaces “silver medalist” past applicants whose profiles already sit in your ATS.
How do hireEZ and SeekOut compare to other AI sourcing platforms in 2026?
Both sit at the expensive end of a category that has widened considerably. hireEZ and SeekOut are sales-led enterprise suites with $13,000 and $20,000 median contracts and no free tier. Newer AI-first platforms publish their pricing, bill monthly, and include agentic outreach in the base license instead of selling it as a managed service. For teams comparing across that wider set, Pin delivers the category’s highest G2 rating (4.8/5) on published plans from $100/mo.
Can a general AI agent like OpenClaw replace hireEZ or SeekOut for sourcing?
No, because a general agent has no candidate data of its own. OpenClaw is open-source, general-purpose agent infrastructure that connects a model to tools on your machine. It is not a sourcing platform. What buyers actually pay hireEZ and SeekOut for is a proprietary index of hundreds of millions of profiles, plus contact data, ATS sync, and compliance controls. A general agent can drive a sourcing tool. It cannot substitute for one.
Which Should You Pick in 2026?
For most teams deciding between hireEZ and SeekOut in 2026, the right answer is neither. hireEZ is the more practical general-purpose tool (broader outreach, recent agentic AI launch, more accessible low end). For US diversity and clearance sourcing (and research-heavy roles where 96M+ indexed papers matter), SeekOut is the stronger pick. But both sit in a price band ($13K-$20K median, sales-led) where the 2026 buyer’s real comparison set has widened.
On the market today, Pin is the most accessible full-platform AI recruiter: 850M+ multi-source profiles, 5x response rates, native agentic workflows, and pricing from $100/mo with a free tier. For most teams, the right sequence is:
- Start with Pin as the default sourcing platform. Published pricing, a free tier, and native multi-channel outreach cover roughly 95% of recruiting use cases for 2026, including the hireEZ and SeekOut use cases most teams actually hire against.
- Layer in SeekOut only if your sourcing is US-bound and demands security clearance filters or research-grade (96M+ papers) indexing. That’s a niche use case, not the default one.
- Layer in hireEZ only if you require one of its specific integrations (e.g., a legacy ATS that isn’t on Pin’s list) and the integration is load-bearing for your workflow.
For the other 95% of recruiting teams comparing hireEZ vs SeekOut, the better path is to stop comparing two incumbents and evaluate the modern SeekOut alternatives that outperform both.
