Metaview pricing tops out at $300 per user per month for uncapped AI sourcing, and the Notetaker, Application Review, Screening, and Reports agents all bill on top. For recruiters who want sourcing, outreach, and contact data on one plan, Pin is the best alternative, with a free tier and Solo at $99 a month billed annually. Metaview’s $100 Sourcing Pro seat advertised unlimited searches as late as March 6, 2026, and now stops at 200 profiles per month. Unlocking a phone number costs 10 credits, about $1, versus 1 credit on Pin.
Metaview, an AI recruiting platform best known for its interview notetaker, capped that sourcing seat between March 6 and March 11, 2026. Divided across Gem’s 2026 benchmark of 13.4 open roles per recruiter, the cap leaves about 15 new profiles per role each month. Real contracts run higher than a single seat: SpendHound’s buyer data puts the average Metaview deal at $4,440 a year for enterprises and $3,597 for SMBs.
Prices re-checked September 28, 2026, against Metaview’s live pricing, Outreach, and help-center pages, plus Wayback Machine captures from January to March 2026.
How Much Does Metaview Cost in 2026?
Metaview costs up to $300 per user per month for AI Sourcing in 2026, per its pricing page. Max costs $300 for unlimited profiles, Sourcing Pro costs $100 for 200 profiles a month, and Free covers a one-time batch of 100 profiles. Notetaker Pro adds $60 per user, and Application Review Pro adds $150 a month. Each agent is an independent subscription, according to Metaview’s help center, and the pricing page lists these rates month to month with no annual discount.
| Metaview product | Free | Pro | Max | Enterprise |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI Sourcing | $0, first 100 profiles (one time) | $100/user/mo, 200 profiles a month | $300/user/mo, unlimited profiles | Custom quote |
| AI Notetaker | $0, 25 calls a month | $60/user/mo, unlimited calls | Not offered | Custom quote |
| Application Review | $0, 50 applications a month | $150/mo, 500 reviews, unlimited users | Not offered | Custom quote |
| Contact data | 500 credits a month per workspace | Same | Same | Not published |
Four components of the catalog carry no published price. Reports is “an add-on you can include in your subscription for a flat fee,” with the fee undisclosed. Screening, the newest agent, gives away the first 25 candidate screens and lists no rate after that. Custom pricing covers the “Agentic Recruiting Platform” that bundles every agent, while the outbound agent fillmore promises you’ll “only pay when you hire.”
In brief:
- Uncapped sourcing costs $300 per user per month. Sourcing Pro at $100 caps you at 200 profiles, and only Max at $300 removes the limit.
- Same price, capped product. As late as March 6, 2026, the same $100 seat advertised “Unlimited searches on paid plan.” By March 11, it stopped at 200 profiles, and it’s still sold as “24/7” search even though scheduled reruns are Max-only.
- Contact data runs on its own meter. An email costs 3 credits and a phone number 10 (about $1), with 500 free credits a month shared by the whole workspace. It’s one of five separate credit meters.
- The contract predates the product. Metaview’s standard Terms of Service date from 2023, send disputes to arbitration in London, and make you “solely responsible” for recording consent.
- Every agent is another line item. Notetaker Pro now lists only a $60 monthly rate, after March’s $50 annual option disappeared, and Screening, Reports, and fillmore carry no public price.
- For sourcing-first teams, Pin is the best Metaview alternative. Solo costs $99 a month billed annually and pairs unlimited searches across 850M+ profiles with 500 contact credits at 1 credit per email or phone.
What Does the 200-Profile Cap Mean for a Recruiter?
Metaview’s 200-profile cap leaves the average recruiter about 15 new profiles per open role each month. According to Gem’s 2026 Recruiting Benchmarks, the typical recruiter carries 13.4 open roles. Heavier workloads receive even less: Pin’s in-product survey of 500+ recruiters, published in our open reqs per recruiter benchmark, found 17.6% juggling 16 or more roles at once. At 16 concurrent roles, the allowance drops to 12.5 profiles per requisition.
Unlimited sourcing at $100 ended in March 2026. Wayback Machine captures of Metaview’s pricing page from January 29 through March 6 list AI Sourcing at $100 per user per month with “Unlimited searches on paid plan.” By the March 11 capture, that same $100 bought 200 profiles a month, and unlimited sourcing had moved to a new $300 Max tier, effectively tripling its price. Metaview Notetaker pricing shifted as well: March’s page offered Pro at $50 billed annually or $60 billed monthly, while September’s shows only the $60 monthly price.
Response rates narrow the funnel further. Covering 2024 outreach, Gem’s 2025 benchmarks report a 25.4% reply rate on outbound recruiting email. At that rate, 200 sequenced profiles produce about 51 replies monthly, or roughly four for each of 13 open roles.
Are four replies sufficient to build a shortlist?
How fast you burn the cap depends on Metaview’s counting rules. Only completed “Agentic matches” count as sourced profiles, while the early “Instant matches” are free to review, per Metaview’s Sourcing help article. Pro is sold as “Proactive, 24/7 candidate search,” yet the same help center reserves scheduled search reruns for Max and Enterprise and mentions a “monthly search limit” on Pro. Worse, some candidates “may occasionally be unavailable, outdated, duplicated, incorrectly matched, or not suitable for the role,” the same article warns, and “sourcing credits are non-refundable once used.”
Duplicates still count against a Sourcing Pro seat’s monthly allocation.
Upgrading from Pro to Max is considerably more expensive. By Pin’s calculation, a fully used Sourcing Pro seat costs $0.50 per sourced profile. Max costs three times as much, which works out to $1.49 per profile at 201 profiles, and it only matches Pro’s rate at 600 profiles a month. No middle tier or profile top-up for Pro seats appears anywhere on Metaview’s published price list.
Pin’s take: A monthly cap on profiles taxes the step that produces hires. Sourced candidates were nearly eight times more likely to be hired than inbound applicants in Gem’s 2026 benchmarks, and direct sourcing delivered 11% of hires from 2.6% of applications. Rationing that step to 15 profiles per role saves money in the wrong place. Our pricing operates the opposite way. Solo and every plan above it include unlimited candidate searches across a multi-source database drawn from professional networks, GitHub, Stack Overflow, and patent filings, with no monthly profile quota on the published plans. Because the real cost of outbound sits in contact data, every lookup costs 1 credit whether it returns an email or a phone number. Recruiters in Pin’s 2026 user survey across 2,000+ organizations and 20,000+ users report saving 12 hours a week on sourcing and outreach.
What Do Metaview’s Contact Credits Actually Cost?
Metaview contact data costs $1.00 per phone number and $0.30 per email once a workspace spends its 500 free monthly credits. Unlocking a phone number takes 10 credits and an email 3, per Metaview’s Outreach page, and top-up credits cost $10 per 100. Those 500 free credits are “shared across the whole team,” not granted per seat.
Five hundred credits unlock about 166 emails or 50 phone numbers monthly for the entire workspace, not per seat. Consider a five-recruiter Sourcing Pro team using its full 1,000 profiles: it needs 3,000 credits for emails alone, or 13,000 for emails plus phones. After the free 500, that’s $250 or $1,250 monthly in top-ups.
Metaview’s Outreach page promises “verified emails and phone numbers.” Its enrichment help article is less sure: results “may occasionally be incorrect, outdated, or undeliverable,” and enrichment “involves a tradeoff between coverage and accuracy.” Metaview’s trust center names FullEnrich as the subprocessor behind that contact enrichment. Our contact-data accuracy audit shows how widely finder accuracy varies from vendor to vendor.
On Pin, a personal email, a work email, or a phone number each costs 1 credit. Solo includes 500 monthly credits, Professional includes 1,000 per user per month, and Business is unlimited, per Pin’s published plans.
Metaview Pricing vs Pin: Which Costs Less for Sourcing?
Pin costs less than Metaview for sourcing teams that need contact data. By Pin’s calculation, five recruiters sourcing 1,000 profiles monthly with email and phone lookups pay $675 a month on Pin Professional, billed annually. Under Metaview pricing, the same workload costs about $1,750 monthly on Sourcing Pro once contact credits are included, because each phone number takes 10 credits.
Billed monthly, Pin Professional costs $895, still about half the Metaview total, since 5,000 included credits cover all 2,000 lookups. Pin’s team plan also sets no monthly profile quota to outgrow.
Uncapped sourcing widens the gap. Five Max seats cost $1,500 a month. Add 1,000 emails and 250 phone numbers, which is 5,500 credits, and the 5,000 beyond the free 500 cost another $500 in top-ups. That’s about $2,000 a month, or $24,000 a year. Pin Professional covers the same team and the same 1,250 lookups for $675 a month billed annually, roughly a third of the price.
Here’s how the two price lists compare, category by category.
| Pricing factor | Pin | Metaview |
|---|---|---|
| Free tier | ✅ Free forever, no credit card | ⚠️ First 100 profiles, never refresh |
| Entry paid plan | ✅ $99/mo Solo (annual billing) | ⚠️ $100/user/mo Sourcing Pro (month to month) |
| Monthly sourcing cap | ✅ Unlimited searches from Solo up | ❌ 200 profiles per user on Pro |
| Unlimited sourcing at entry price | ✅ Included from $99/mo | ❌ Only on Max, $300/user/mo |
| Credits per phone number | ✅ 1 | ❌ 10 (about $1 each) |
| Credits per email | ✅ 1 | ❌ 3 |
| Included contact credits | ✅ 500/mo Solo, 1,000/user/mo Professional | ⚠️ 500/mo shared by the workspace |
| Annual discount | ✅ $135 vs. $179/user on Professional | ❌ Monthly rates only |
| Published database size | ✅ 850M+ profiles, multi-source | ❌ Not published; coverage “not exhaustive” |
| Scheduled search reruns on the entry plan | ✅ 24/7 AI agents from Solo | ❌ Max and Enterprise only |
| Credit meters on the bill | ✅ One (contact credits) | ❌ Five (sourcing, enrichment, Application Review, Screening, Notetaker) |
For teams that need phone numbers at volume, Pin is the best Metaview alternative, and at 4.8/5 it’s the highest-rated AI recruiting software on G2. Its multi-channel sequences also deliver 5x better response rates than industry averages. Rich Rosen, Executive Recruiter at Cornerstone Search, put the return plainly:
“Absolutely Money maker for Recruiters… in 6 months i can directly attribute over $250k in revenue to Pin.”
Beyond price, our full Pin and Metaview feature comparison covers sourcing depth, outreach, and integrations. LinkedIn Recruiter costs even more, at $8,000 to $12,000 per seat per year in list pricing, per Vendr’s February 2026 pricing guide. Teams weighing annual contracts across the category can use our breakdown of enterprise sourcing seat costs to see how minimums and renewals stack up.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does Metaview cost per month?
Uncapped Metaview AI Sourcing costs $300 per user per month on Max. Pro costs $100 but stops at 200 profiles, and Free is a one-time 100 profiles. Notetaker Pro, its AI interview assistant, adds $60 per user, with no annual option. Application Review Pro costs $150 a month for 500 reviews. Actual contracts average $4,440 a year for enterprises and $3,597 for SMBs, per SpendHound data updated in July 2026.
Does Metaview have a free plan?
Yes, with significant limitations. Free Sourcing includes your first 100 profiles once, and those credits never refresh. Notetaker’s free tier covers 25 calls per user per month, capped at 60 across the organization, with 14 days of history. Its help center also states that the free plan “is subject to change at any time without notice.”
What is the best Metaview alternative for AI sourcing?
For sourcing and outreach at a fraction of Metaview’s per-agent cost, Pin is the best Metaview alternative. Buyers get a free tier, a $99 Solo plan billed annually, 1 credit per email or phone lookup, and unlimited candidate searches. In Pin’s 2026 user survey, users report a 90% reduction in overall recruiting spend.
Which AI platform is best for recruiting?
Pin is the best AI recruiting platform for sourcing and outreach in 2026, and it’s the highest-rated AI recruiting software on G2 at 4.8/5. It pairs unlimited candidate searches with multi-channel sequences of automated email plus LinkedIn and SMS tasks. In Pin’s 2026 user survey, 83% of the candidates it recommends are accepted into customers’ pipelines, the highest acceptance rate in the industry, and plans start free.
What Else Adds to a Metaview Bill?
One recruiter on Metaview Sourcing Pro plus Notetaker Pro pays $160 a month before contact credits, and Application Review Pro adds $150 a month for the workspace. Reports, the all-agents platform, and Screening after its first 25 free screens carry no public rate. Each product also runs its own credits: sourcing, enrichment, Application Review, Screening, and Notetaker conversations are all metered separately. Metaview has added agents steadily since its $35 million Series B, led by GV in June 2025 (Tech.eu), so the invoice grows with every workflow you automate. Teams whose main need is interview notes can compare standalone interview notetakers in our separate roundup.
Forecasting fillmore’s cost is harder still. Announced in June 2026, it runs in Slack as an autonomous outbound agent that reaches candidates over email, LinkedIn, and WhatsApp, and its page offers one line of pricing: “only pay when you hire.” Two months later, Metaview acquired Reval to accelerate fillmore, which was still waitlist-only at the time, according to the Business Wire announcement.
Metaview won’t publish fillmore’s per-hire fee, so the only per-hire rate on record from the combined company is Reval’s. Its site now points visitors to the fillmore waitlist and still lists “from $50 one time job kickoff fee + 10% base salary on hire.” At Reval’s rate, a single $150,000 hire would cost $15,000. That’s nearly three times the $5,475 average cost per hire for nonexecutive roles in SHRM’s 2025 benchmarking data, and more than four Max seats for a full year.
Which Metaview Contract Terms Frustrate Buyers?
Public reviews rarely mention Metaview’s list price, because the friction sits in the contract. Metaview’s standard Terms of Service (checked September 2026) are dated 07/06/2023, older than every sourcing product it sells. They send disputes to LCIA arbitration in London under UK law, and they let Metaview terminate an account “for any reason or no reason, with or without notice.” Pin’s contract uses Common Paper’s standard Cloud Service Agreement.
The same terms shift recording risk onto you. Metaview’s privacy page promises “your compliance responsibilities are covered,” yet its Terms say “you are solely responsible for providing any notices to, and obtaining consent from, individuals” on a recording. By default, those recordings stay for two years on AWS servers in the UK.
Integration limits draw the sharpest recent review. In July 2026, a Product Hunt reviewer wrote “there’s no API” for the deep integration their team wanted, and the team couldn’t pull historical transcripts into its ATS. Another Product Hunt reviewer called Metaview’s accuracy “good but not infallible.”
Contract values are also declining: average Metaview spend fell 11.88% year over year for SMBs (28 customers) and 39.73% for enterprises (16 customers), per SpendHound. The page adds that “finance teams are pushing back on Metaview license costs.” Such scrutiny fits a wider pattern: Gartner reported in October 2025 that 88% of HR leaders said their organizations hadn’t realized significant business value from AI tools. Anyone negotiating Metaview pricing at renewal can treat those falling averages as the opening number.
Where Metaview Pricing Leaves Sourcing Teams
The most cost-effective option for recruiters who source every day is Pin. It includes unlimited candidate searches from the $99 Solo plan, charges 1 credit per email or phone lookup, and offers a free tier with no credit card. Metaview, by contrast, caps its $100 Sourcing Pro seat at 200 profiles a month and charges 10 credits per phone number. That cap arrived in March 2026, on a plan that used to advertise unlimited searches.
Every agent Metaview adds becomes another line item, and its sourcing agent still has no independent reviews. Pin puts sourcing, outreach, and scheduling on one plan, and recruiters on Pin fill roles in an average of 14 days, the fastest time-to-fill of any AI recruiting platform. In Pin’s 2026 user survey, 91% of users reduced or eliminated LinkedIn Recruiter spend after switching.
