Greenhouse vs Recruiterflow
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Greenhouse is the stronger AI pick in Recruiting: it has a visibility score of 38.5 versus 3.1 for Recruiterflow, and ranks ahead in 100% of the answers that name both.
Choose Greenhouse if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (38.5 vs 3.1)
- AI answers describe it more positively (56% vs 33% positive)
- You need ISO 27001:2022 or ISO 27701:2019 or ISO 42001:2023 or CCPA/CPRA or PCI DSS coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (501–1,000 employees)
Choose Recruiterflow if…
- You need SOC 2 Type 1 or ISO 27001 coverage
- Per seat pricing suits your budget better than flat tiers
- Attractive for recruitment agencies and staffing teams
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | Greenhouse | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 38.5% | 3.1% |
| Change vs last week | New | New |
| Rank in Recruiting | #1 | #30 |
| Share of voice | 8.1% | 0.7% |
| Mentions this run | 43 | 4 |
| Positive in AI answers | 56% | 33% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Greenhouse 0pp · Recruiterflow 0pp over 0 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Greenhouse leads on 3 of 3 engines
Head to head in AI answers
1 engine answers name both brands
| Prompt | Engine | Greenhouse | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best recruiting platform with AI features | Perplexity | #2 | #9 |
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Greenhouse | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Flat tiers | Per seat |
| Entry price | Contact sales | $149 per seat / mo |
| Free plan | No | No |
| Deployment | — | SaaS |
| Integrations | — | 30+ |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type 2, ISO 27001:2022, ISO 27701:2019, ISO 42001:2023, GDPR, CCPA/CPRA, PCI DSS | SOC 2 Type 2, SOC 2 Type 1, ISO 27001, GDPR |
| Support | — | SLA-backed support, Dedicated implementation, Live chat with a rep, FAQ and help articles |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
| Headquarters | New York City, NY, United States | San Francisco, CA, United States |
| Employees | 501–1,000 | 51–200 |
| Funding | Series D · $110M raised | Bootstrapped |
| Best for | Employers that want structured, automated hiring across sourcing, interviews and the ATS, from early-stage companies to global enterprises | Retained, contingent and executive search firms and recruiting and staffing agencies that want AI tools alongside a full ATS and CRM |
Plans side by side
Recruiterflow
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Greenhouse
- Strong structured hiring and interview scorecards
- Strong reporting and data visibility
- Top ratings and popularity for enterprise and mid-market recruiting
- Integration ecosystem and unified data
- Reduces hiring bias and supports compliance
Recruiterflow
- Attractive for recruitment agencies and staffing teams
- Priced at $119/user/month billed annually
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 100%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Greenhouse vs Recruiterflow”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/greenhouse-vs-recruiterflow, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.