Recruiting
Homerun
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Homerun B.V. · www.homerun.co
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Homerun B.V. of Amsterdam sells Homerun ATS — a career page with personalized job openings — plus Homerun HR for employee data, at \"starting from € 109 per month\", a 15-day trial with no credit card needed, and one-month or one-year terms. Strongest is applicant data governance at 4 to 5: the terms publish automatic retention policies, manual and bulk deletion, a seven-day archive for deleted ATS data, backups erased after thirty-five days, and export on request. Weakest is the hiring workflow — candidate pipeline at 0 to 2, job distribution flat at 2 — with no public information on stages, scorecards, who decided what, or distribution beyond the career page. AI screening control scores 2 to 3 with no statement either way on matching or ranking. Integrations span 1 to 3 and sovereignty 3 to 4 — a Dutch contracting entity and DPA credited, hosting for applicant data unstated, the published subprocessor list covering the vendor's websites — pricing transparency 3 to 4, the pricing basis and tier contents unstated. flagged splits show nothing to flag; spreads weigh the same facts differently.
Speaks for it
- Published candidate-data controls — automatic retention policies, manual and bulk deletion, a seven-day archive for deleted ATS data, backups erased after thirty-five days
- A public starting price of "starting from € 109 per month", with a 15-day trial, no credit card needed, and one-month or one-year terms
- A DPA integral to the terms setting Homerun as processor and the customer as controller, with transfers outside the EEA tied to GDPR Chapter 5
- An export of all account data on request, with thirty days to export after termination for Homerun ATS
- A European contracting entity — Homerun B.V. of Amsterdam under Dutch law — with breach notification without undue delay to the privacy contact
Held against it
- No public information on pipeline stages per job, hiring-manager permissions, scorecards, interview scheduling, or any record of who decided what
- No public information on job-board distribution beyond the career page, including German boards or Google for Jobs markup
- No published statement either way on AI matching, ranking, CV parsing, or automated rejection
- The "Integrations Partners" footer names no system, with no public information on a documented API, single sign-on, or handover to a named HR or payroll system
- Hosting location for applicant data is unstated, and the published subprocessor list covers the vendor's websites — including providers based outside the EEA — rather than the ATS data chain
Best for
- You need a career-page-first ATS for a small or growing team, since the career page with personalized job openings is the confirmed core
- You put weight on candidate-data governance you can read before signing — retention policies, deletion, backup erasure, export
- You want to evaluate from public pages first — a published starting price, a 15-day trial with no credit card needed, one-month or one-year terms
- A Dutch-law contracting entity with a DPA integral to the terms matters to you, and you are prepared to ask the vendor directly where applicant data is hosted
Avoid if
- You need documented pipeline stages, scorecards, interview scheduling, and a record of who decided what for audit or co-determination purposes
- You depend on the ATS itself for multiposting to German job boards or Google for Jobs markup
- You must show a works council or data-protection officer whether AI matching or ranking is used and how it is switched off
- You need named integrations, a documented API, or single sign-on into existing HR or payroll systems
The scores
Applicant management & hiring workflow
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The daily work of hiring: pipeline stages per job, collaboration with hiring managers, structured evaluation, interview scheduling and candidate communication — judged on whether a decision is documented rather than merely made.
0 — An inbox of applications with a status field; no stages per job, no shared evaluation and no record of who decided what.
3 — A fixed pipeline with drag-and-drop stages and email templates, but hiring managers see everything or nothing, and evaluation is free-text comments.
5 — Configurable pipelines per job, hiring-manager access limited to their own vacancies, structured scorecards, interview scheduling with calendar integration, and templated candidate emails in German.
8 — Approval workflows for requisitions and offers, role-based access per team and location, structured interview kits, bulk actions with automated but reviewable candidate communication, and a history on each candidate of every stage change and who made it.
10 — The pipeline is an auditable record of a fair process: every decision attributed and reasoned, evaluation criteria fixed before applications arrive, reporting on time-to-hire and drop-off per stage, and the full history exportable per candidate for an AGG dispute.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
The captured pages describe Homerun ATS as "a career page and personalized job openings for which candidates can apply", and the pricing page adds only "ATS — Organise your hiring" — we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, hiring-manager permissions, structured scorecards, interview scheduling, or any record of who decided what. Marketing copy about organising hiring is not evidence of the workflow. For sixty hires a year, a decision I cannot document is a decision I cannot defend. 4 2 1
The Employer Branding Manager
The terms describe the ATS as a career page with job openings candidates apply to, and that is where the workflow evidence stops: I found no public information on pipeline stages per job, hiring-manager access, scorecards, interview scheduling or any record of who decided what. For a tool my recruiters live in all day, that reads as an application inbox at best. 4 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages show an ATS that receives applications against jobs created for a career page, and nothing further about the hiring workflow itself. We found no public information on pipeline stages per job, structured scorecards, interview scheduling, or any record of who decided a stage change. 1 4
The Works Council Advocate
The captured pages describe recruitment software with a career page and job openings for candidates to apply to, but we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, hiring-manager permissions, structured evaluation, or any record of who decided what. For a works council the pipeline is the co-determination object, and none of it is documented here. 4 1
The HR IT Integrator
The captured pages describe an ATS whose stated purpose is 'a career page and personalized job openings' candidates can apply to, plus 'ATS — Organise your hiring'; we found no public information on stages per job, hiring-manager permissions, scorecards, interview scheduling or any record of who decided what. Without an evidenced decision trail, I have nothing to hand over or audit at the end of a hire. 1 2 4
The Skeptic
The captured pages describe an ATS with a career page and personalized job openings candidates apply to, but we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, scorecards, hiring-manager permissions, interview scheduling or any record of who decided what. For a tool whose daily work is the pipeline, that silence is the whole story. 1 3 4
Multiposting, career page & candidate experience
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting a vacancy in front of the right people and letting them apply: job-board distribution for the German market, the career page, and an application process that does not lose candidates on a phone.
0 — No career page and no job-board distribution; vacancies are posted by hand elsewhere.
3 — A basic hosted job list and free aggregator feeds, with no named German boards, and an application form that requires an account or a desktop.
5 — A branded career page, multiposting to named boards including the Bundesagentur für Arbeit and at least one major German paid board, Google for Jobs markup, and mobile application without an account.
8 — Multiposting with booking and budget tracking per board from inside the system, source attribution per applicant, career page in several languages with an embeddable widget, accessibility stated, and an application form configurable per job.
10 — Distribution is measured, not only broadcast: cost and applicants per channel reported, the career page meets a stated accessibility standard, one-click or CV-parse application on mobile, and candidates can see their own status and withdraw themselves.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
A career page with "personalized job openings" that candidates apply to is confirmed in the terms, the privacy statement and the site itself. We found no public information on job-board distribution of any kind, on German boards such as the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, on Google for Jobs markup, or on whether applying works on a phone without an account — for my German locations I would have to solve distribution elsewhere. 4 3 1
The Employer Branding Manager
A career page and personalized job openings are confirmed, which is the one asset I own and want to control. Beyond that I found no public information on job-board distribution or German boards, Google for Jobs markup, or whether a candidate can apply from a phone without creating an account, so my cost-per-applicant-per-channel question has nothing to hang on. 4 3 1
The Data Protection Officer
Creating a career page with personalised job openings is confirmed in the terms and privacy statement. We found no public information on job-board distribution of any kind, German boards included, on Google for Jobs markup, on mobile application, or on candidates seeing their own status. 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
A career page with personalized job openings is documented; we found no public information on job-board distribution, named German boards such as the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, Google for Jobs markup, or how the application form behaves on a phone. Distribution beyond the vendor's own career page cannot be assessed from these pages. 4 1
The HR IT Integrator
A self-built career page with personalized job openings is the product's stated core and there is a 'standout candidate experience' claim on the homepage, but we found no public information on job-board distribution of any kind, German boards, Google for Jobs markup, mobile application or accessibility. For a German-market buyer, no named distribution channel means every posting is manual. 1 4
The Skeptic
A hosted career page with personalized job openings is confirmed as the product's core promise, but we found no public information on job-board distribution of any kind — no named German boards, no Bundesagentur feed, no Google for Jobs markup — and nothing about the application form on a phone. The career page is real; everything that gets a vacancy beyond it is invisible on the captured pages. 1 4
Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What happens to the data of people who were not hired: automatic deletion on a configurable deadline, talent-pool consent that expires, data-subject requests, and access logging — the criterion the employer is actually liable for.
0 — Nothing stated about retention or deletion; applicant data stays until someone removes it by hand.
3 — Manual deletion and an anonymise button exist, but no automatic deadline, and talent-pool storage has no stated consent step.
5 — Automatic deletion or anonymisation after a configurable period after rejection, talent-pool storage only with recorded consent, and a documented way to answer an access or erasure request.
8 — Retention rules per country or entity, consent with expiry and automated re-consent requests, candidate self-service for their own data, a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file, and permissions a works council can review.
10 — Governance that can be evidenced: deletion runs are logged and reportable, special-category data can be excluded or restricted by field, every export is recorded, and the vendor publishes how deletion propagates to backups and to the job boards and tools it syncs with.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
The terms confirm customers can define automatic retention policies for candidate data, delete manually or in bulk, that deleted ATS data is archived for seven days, that backups are erased after thirty-five days, and that an export of all data is available on request — stating openly how deletion propagates to backups is more than most publish. We found no public information on talent-pool consent or its expiry, candidate self-service, or a log of who viewed an applicant file, and those are exactly what a works council or the supervisory authority asks about. 4 3
The Employer Branding Manager
The terms let the customer define automatic retention policies for candidate personal data as well as delete manually or in bulk, deleted ATS data is archived seven days, and backups are erased after thirty-five days — published behaviour for how deletion reaches backups, plus listed data-subject rights and a privacy contact. I found no public information on talent-pool consent, access logging or per-country retention rules, so this stops short of governance a works council could review. 4 3
The Data Protection Officer
Customers can define automatic retention policies for candidate personal data and delete manually or in bulk, back-ups are erased after thirty-five days, and an access or erasure request has a documented route through the privacy contact. Nothing in the captures ties deletion to the date of rejection, and we found no public information on talent-pool consent or its expiry, on candidate self-service, or on any log of who viewed or exported an applicant file. 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
Automatic retention policies for candidate data, manual and bulk deletion, a seven-day archive after deletion, backups erased after thirty-five days, and an export of all personal data on request are stated in the terms — substance a council can work with. We found no public information on talent-pool consent or its expiry, on any log of who viewed or exported an applicant file, or on retention rules per country, and that is exactly where the employer's liability sits. 4 3
The HR IT Integrator
Automatic retention policies for candidate data, manual and bulk deletion, a seven-day archive window, backups erased after thirty-five days, an export on request and a full list of data-subject rights are all evidenced in the terms and privacy statement. We found no public information on talent-pool consent, per-country retention rules, or a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file — so the policy half is real, the evidence half is not. 3 4
The Skeptic
The terms let the customer define automatic retention policies for candidate data with manual and bulk deletion, deleted ATS data is archived seven days for error correction, backups are erased after thirty-five days, and a documented export plus a privacy contact answer data-subject requests — but we found no public information on talent-pool consent, consent expiry, view or export logging, or reportable deletion runs. 3 4
AI screening transparency & control
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether any automated ranking, matching, parsing or rejection is disclosed, explained and switchable — recruitment is a high-risk use under the EU AI Act, and an undisclosed score next to a candidate's name is a co-determination matter. A product without AI features is judged on stating so.
0 — AI matching or scoring is marketed with no statement of what it evaluates, where it runs, or whether it can be turned off.
3 — AI features are described as a benefit, with a general assurance that humans decide, but no documentation of inputs, no per-feature switch and no model or provider named.
5 — Each AI feature is described with its purpose and inputs, can be disabled per account, never rejects a candidate without a human action, and the model provider or subprocessor is named.
8 — AI outputs are shown with their reasoning to the recruiter, candidates are informed when AI is used, protected attributes are stated to be excluded, EU processing is available for the AI features, and the vendor publishes its EU AI Act position.
10 — The vendor treats recruitment AI as the high-risk system the law says it is: documentation a works council can base an agreement on, bias testing described and repeated, logs of every AI-assisted decision retained for audit, and every AI feature off by default until the customer enables it.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
No AI matching, ranking, parsing or rejection appears anywhere in the captured pages, and equally we found no public information stating that none is used — no feature description, no per-feature switch, no model or provider named, no EU AI Act position. I cannot tell a works council whether there is anything to control. Silence on a high-risk use is not the same as a documented statement that recruitment runs without AI. 1 2 4
The Employer Branding Manager
The captured marketing and terms show no AI matching, ranking or parsing features, so nothing is marketed that goes unexplained — but the vendor also states no position on automated decision-making or the EU AI Act. I found no public information either way, so I can credit no per-feature switches, no named provider and no reasoning shown to recruiters. 1 2 4
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages neither describe any parsing, matching, ranking or rejection feature nor state that the product works without one. We found no public information on per-feature switches, a model or AI provider, or the vendor's EU AI Act position, so a works council has nothing on paper to agree on. 1 4
The Works Council Advocate
We found no public information on any automated ranking, matching or CV parsing, and equally no statement that none is used. Recruitment is a high-risk use under the EU AI Act, and we will not agree to a product where the public pages cannot tell us whether a score sits next to an applicant's name or whether it can be switched off. 1 4
The HR IT Integrator
No captured page mentions matching, ranking, CV parsing or automated decisions, and there is equally no published statement that the product ships without them; we found no public information either way on AI features, per-feature switches, providers or an EU AI Act position. As the person who would have to explain this to a works council, total silence gives me nothing to base an agreement on. 1 2
The Skeptic
Nothing on the captured pages mentions matching, scoring, CV parsing or automated rejection, and the vendor equally makes no published statement that none is used — so a buyer cannot determine from public pages whether an undisclosed score sits next to a candidate's name. For a high-risk use under the EU AI Act, silence in both directions is what this score reflects. 1 3 4
HR handover, integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The hire does not end in the ATS: handover to the HR system and payroll, identity and calendar integration, e-signature for contracts, and an API a team can build on.
0 — No integrations and no API; a hired candidate is retyped into the HR system.
3 — A CSV export and an email integration, with a partner marketplace that names no German HR or payroll systems.
5 — A documented API, calendar and video-interview integration, and a named handover to at least one HR system common in DACH (e.g. Personio, DATEV-connected systems, SAP SuccessFactors).
8 — Maintained integrations with several named HR systems carrying the hire's data without retyping, SSO and SCIM, e-signature for offers and contracts, webhooks, and an API with published limits.
10 — Integration is designed rather than bolted on: a versioned API with a deprecation policy, handover that carries documents and consent status into the HR record, deletion that propagates to connected systems, and the vendor maintaining the German integrations itself.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
An "Integrations Partners" link sits in the footer with no named systems behind it on the captured pages, and Homerun offers its own HR product for employee data alongside the ATS. We found no public information on a documented API, calendar or e-signature integration, SSO, or handover to an HR system common in DACH such as Personio or DATEV-connected systems; the terms do give an export of all account data on request, which is a portability right rather than a working integration. 1 4
The Employer Branding Manager
The site footer lists an Integrations Partners section, and the vendor sells its own HR product beside the ATS, which hints a hire could move without retyping. I found no public information on a documented API, named DACH HR or payroll systems, SSO, e-signature or webhooks, so the handover story rests on a footer link. 1 2 4
The Data Protection Officer
The homepage footer names "Integrations Partners" without identifying a single system, and the only evidenced way out of the product is an export of account data on request, with thirty days to export after termination for the ATS. We found no public information on a documented API, SSO, e-signature, or a handover carrying a hire into a named HR or payroll system. 1 4
The Works Council Advocate
The site names integrations partners without naming any German HR or payroll system, the vendor offers its own HR product alongside the ATS, and an export of account data is available on request with stated post-termination windows. We found no public information on a documented API, on how a hire's file and consent status travel into the HR record, or on single sign-on. 1 4 2
The HR IT Integrator
The only integration evidence is an 'Integrations Partners' footer that names no system, and the only HR connection described is the vendor's own Homerun HR module; data otherwise leaves the ATS as an export Homerun provides on request. We found no public information on a documented API, SSO, SCIM, calendar, e-signature, webhooks or handover to Personio, SAP SuccessFactors or DATEV-connected systems — so I cannot tell who maintains anything, or whether a hire arrives as data or as retyping. 1 4
The Skeptic
The homepage footer carries an "Integrations Partners" heading but the captured pages name nothing behind it, and we found no public information on a documented API, calendar or video-interview integration, SSO or e-signature. Even the vendor's own HR product is nowhere described as a handover target carrying hires out of the ATS. 1 4
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where applicant data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are — including the job boards, CV parsers and AI providers the system passes CVs to. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted higher here than in categories holding the customer's own data, because every record belongs to a third party who never chose the vendor.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and CV parsing or AI processing of unclear location.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent, or CV parsing and AI features run outside the EU without saying so.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — parsing, AI, email delivery — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published including parsing and AI providers, and a DPA that covers applicant data as the customer's processing.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, certification published, and the AI and CV-parsing features run within the EU on providers the customer can see.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
The contracting entity is confirmed as Homerun B.V. of Amsterdam under Dutch law with exclusive venue in Amsterdam, the DPA sets processor and controller roles for applicant data, and transfers outside the EEA are tied to GDPR Chapter 5. But hosting for the applicant data itself is not stated on the captured pages, and the published subprocessor list reads as website tooling — Mailchimp, Google Analytics, Webflow and Amazon Web Services for web hosting — with some of those third parties outside the EEA. An EU address and a clean DPA do not tell me where the CVs actually sit. 4 3
The Employer Branding Manager
The contracting entity is Homerun B.V. in Amsterdam under Dutch law with a DPA naming the customer as controller, which is a European footing. But hosting location for applicant data is unstated, and the published third-party list covers the vendor's website — including providers stated to sit outside the EEA — rather than the ATS data chain, so I found no public information on where CVs are hosted or which subprocessors process them. 4 3
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity is Homerun B.V. of Singel 542, Amsterdam, under Dutch law with a published trade register number, and the privacy statement lists third parties with Chapter 5 GDPR safeguards for transfers outside the EEA. That list covers the website stack — analytics, ads, video, newsletters and hosting that includes Amazon Web Services — while we found no public information on where the ATS stores applicant data, on a CV parser, or on an AI provider, and ISO 27001 and ISO 27701 appear only as an optional way to satisfy audit rights. 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is European and unambiguous — Homerun B.V. in Amsterdam under Dutch law — and transfers outside the EEA are tied to GDPR Chapter 5. But we found no public information on where candidate data is hosted, and the published subprocessor list covers the vendor's websites (analytics, advertising, hosting) rather than the applicant-data chain; for third-party applicants who never chose this vendor, the chain we cannot see is the problem. 4 3
The HR IT Integrator
The contracting entity is Homerun B.V. of Singel 542, Amsterdam, under Dutch law with Amsterdam venue, and a DPA integral to the terms covers candidate processing with GDPR Chapter V transfer commitments and breach notification. We found no public information on where candidate data is hosted or which subprocessors process it; the published subprocessor list covers the vendor's websites and marketing and names US-based providers among them. 3 4
The Skeptic
Homerun B.V. of Amsterdam is the contracting entity under Dutch law with a DPA covering candidate data as the customer's processing and a GDPR Chapter 5 transfer commitment — but hosting location for the applicant data itself is unstated, and the only published subprocessor list covers the vendor's websites, naming non-EEA providers such as Amazon Web Services, Google, Hotjar and Mailchimp, rather than the ATS chain. 3 4
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: the pricing model (per employee, per open job, per recruiter seat), job-board posting costs, add-ons for AI, career page or integrations, and the minimum term.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A starting price exists, but the pricing basis (employees, jobs, seats) or which features sit in which tier is unstated — the invoice is unknowable.
5 — Tier prices public with the pricing basis and main limits given, but at least one commonly needed piece (paid job-board postings, AI features, integrations, extra seats) is unpriced.
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its basis and limits, add-on prices listed, job-board posting costs or the booking model stated, minimum term and VAT treatment given.
10 — Complete price computability: annual invoice derivable for a given company size, number of open roles and recruiter seats, with every add-on, posting package and overage published.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
Public pages give a starting price of "€ 109 per month", a fifteen-day trial with no credit card, terms of one month or one year with automatic renewal and one month's cancellation notice, and fees stated in EUR or GBP exclusive of VAT. What the pricing basis is — seats, jobs or employees — which features sit in which tier, and what anything beyond the entry price costs is not on the captured pages, so my annual invoice for sixty hires is not computable from public information. 1 2 4
The Employer Branding Manager
A real number exists — starting from € 109 per month — and the terms add invoice facts: fees in EUR or GBP exclusive of VAT, billing in advance, terms of one month or one year, one month's cancellation notice and a 15-day trial without credit card. But the pricing basis and which features sit in which tier are absent from the captured pages, and I found no public information on job-board posting costs or add-ons, so I cannot compute an annual invoice. 1 4 2
The Data Protection Officer
A public starting price of "starting from € 109 per month" comes with currency and VAT treatment, one-month or one-year terms, auto-renewal with one month's notice, and a fifteen-day trial without a credit card. We found no public information on the pricing basis — seats, jobs or employees — on which features sit in which tier, or on add-on prices, so a buyer still cannot compute an annual invoice. 1 2 4
The Works Council Advocate
A starting price is public — "starting from € 109 per month" — along with term options of one month or one year, fees in EUR or GBP exclusive of VAT, payment by SEPA direct debit or credit card, and no refunds. We found no public information on the pricing basis, on which features sit in which tier, or on add-on prices, so the real annual invoice is not computable from the captured pages. 1 4 2
The HR IT Integrator
A starting price of '€ 109 per month' is public, together with one-month and one-year terms, VAT-exclusive fees and a 15-day trial without credit card, but the pricing basis — seats, employees or open jobs — and the contents of each tier are not stated. The annual invoice is not computable from the captured pages, and add-ons and posting costs go unmentioned. 1 4
The Skeptic
A starting price of "starting from € 109 per month" is published, with term options of one month or one year, auto-renewal cancellable on one month's notice, and fees stated in EUR or GBP exclusive of VAT — but the captured pages never say what the € 109 buys in terms of seats, jobs or employees, nor which features sit in which tier, so the real annual invoice is not computable from public pages. 1 2 4
European sovereignty — proven facts
2 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in NL | 3/3 pts | 3 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 3 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. Intercom (a US-headquartered provider) appears only in the website cookie table, and the Terms' dedicated Sub-Processors section is skipped in the excerpt, so the product's full subprocessor list remains unverified.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 19 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 14 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 legal fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 subprocessors fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (14)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.homerun.co Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.homerun.co Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.homerun.co Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Terms of service www.homerun.co Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap www.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap www.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Multiposting, career page & candidate experience — found from sitemap help.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Multiposting, career page & candidate experience — found from sitemap help.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap www.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap help.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap www.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap help.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap www.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap www.homerun.co Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →