Hirovia
Honest comparison

Hirovia vs résumé screening by hand

This is what most teams actually do, so it deserves a fair hearing. Manual screening is free, flexible and needs no vendor. It is also the approach most damaged by AI-written applications.

Try Hirovia free See a real report

Five candidates free · no card · no sales call

How we write these. We describe résumé screening by hand by how they publicly position themselves, we credit what they do better than us, and we don't quote prices we can't verify — check their current pricing directly. If you think anything here is unfair or out of date, tell us and we'll correct it.
Credit where it's due

What résumé screening by hand is genuinely good at

  • Free, immediate, and entirely under your control
  • A good recruiter reads context and nuance no assessment captures
  • Works fine at low volume — twenty applicants for a specialist role is a human-sized job
  • No new tool, no data processing agreement, nothing to learn
The difference

Where Hirovia takes a different approach

The document stopped separating people

When every application is polished by the same models, reading them harder does not recover the signal. The differences you are reading were written by a language model.

Time is the real cost

Roughly two and a half minutes per application is about 40 hours per 1,000 applicants — a working week that produces a ranking you cannot defend afterwards.

Consistency across readers

Two recruiters rank the same pile differently. One scoring model does not.

Explainability

"It felt right" is a weak answer to a rejected candidate, a hiring manager, or a regulator asking how the shortlist was produced.

The short answer

Which one should you pick?

Choose résumé screening by hand if…

You are hiring one person, you have twenty applicants, and you know the market personally.

Choose Hirovia if…

Volume has outgrown the hours available, or you need the shortlist to be explainable to someone else.

What you'd actually get

One score, and the evidence behind it

Whatever you compare us against, this is the output: every applicant ranked on the same 0–100 scale, with the components visible so any decision can be explained.

What their résumé says
What Hirovia measured
Candidate A

“Results-driven. Grew revenue 40%. Exceptional communicator.”

Keyword match 96%
89Interview first

Inside the target zones for the role. Validity checks clean.

Candidate C

“Results-focused. Grew revenue 42%. Exceptional communicator.”

Keyword match 97% — best of the pool
38Flagged

41 identical answers in a row and two failed attention checks.

The best paperwork belonged to the worst applicant. Why that keeps happening →

Other comparisons

See how we stack up elsewhere

vs TestGorilla vs HireVue vs Criteria Corp vs Indeed Assessments

Judge it on your own applicants.

Five candidates free. No credit card, no demo, no sales call — the fastest way to settle any comparison.

Start free Ask us a hard question