Recruiting
Jobylon
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Jobylon AB · www.jobylon.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Jobylon at a glance
- Vendor
- Jobylon AB
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Jobylon 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Jobylon, a recruiting platform from Jobylon AB of Sweden, scores highest on AI screening control — a flat 7 — for an AI Matcher that is off by default, switched on per job, reads only CV and job-ad text with demographic attributes excluded, never ranks or rejects on its own, and offers a candidate opt-out that stops scoring. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Jobylon, a recruiting platform from Jobylon AB of Sweden, scores highest on AI screening control — a flat 7 — for an AI Matcher that is off by default, switched on per job, reads only CV and job-ad text with demographic attributes excluded, never ranks or rejects on its own, and offers a candidate opt-out that stops scoring. Sovereignty sits at 3: the sovereignty listing reads "no sovereignty attributes on record", and we found no public information on hosting location, subprocessors, or where the AI and CV parsing run. Integrations and handover land at 6 to 7, split between judges crediting named handover to SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR and HiBob — with middleware partners doing part of the work — and judges weighing who maintains the connections. Candidate pipeline spreads 4 to 6 over stage-level configuration documented without any public record of who moved a candidate and when. Applicant data governance runs 4 to 5, and job distribution sits at 4 on a Nordic-and-global board list. Pricing transparency scores 0; the shown route to a number is a 30-min call.
Speaks for it
- The AI Matcher is off by default and switched on per job, reads only CV and job-ad text with demographic attributes excluded, never ranks or rejects on its own, and lets candidates opt out so their application is not scored.
- Automated cleanup offers delete, anonymise or hide a set number of months after application, after a stage move such as Rejected, or when a job is archived, with anonymisation permanently deleting personal data while keeping the record for reports.
- Named handover to SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR and HiBob, new-hire transfer via Kombo, Sympa and Harmonizer, e-signing via Scrive, Oneflow and GetAccept, and an OpenAPI partner API reference.
- Admin-configurable pipelines with addable stages, Lost Reasons on inactive stages and Idle Applicants toggles, plus permissions and access control for multi-team and multi-brand, multi-country setups.
- Candidate requests for rectification, erasure, restriction and objection are documented as routed through the employer as controller, with features in the product to act on them.
Held against it
- The sovereignty listing reads "no sovereignty attributes on record", and we found no public information on hosting location, subprocessors, or where the AI Matcher and CV parsing process data.
- We found no public information on structured scorecards, offer approval workflows, or a per-candidate record of who changed a stage and when.
- We found no public information on single sign-on, SCIM, webhooks or published API limits, and several HR connections run through partner middleware rather than connections the vendor maintains itself.
- The named boards are the Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish public employment services, FINN, Indeed, LinkedIn Premium Jobs and Stack Overflow; we found no public information on the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, German paid boards, or Google for Jobs markup.
- Talent pools are marketed without a stated consent step or expiry, and retention schedules are set up via your Jobylon point of contact rather than in-product.
Best for
- You hire across the Nordics and want distribution to Arbetsförmedlingen, NAV and TE-Palvelut plus FINN, Indeed, LinkedIn Premium Jobs and Stack Overflow, alongside branded multi-brand career sites.
- You want AI matching you can defend internally: off by default, switched on per job, text-only inputs with demographic attributes excluded, always overridable, with a candidate opt-out that blocks scoring — the product's highest-scoring criterion at 7.
- Your HR stack includes SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR or HiBob and you accept partner middleware such as Kombo, Sympa or Harmonizer for new-hire data transfer.
- You need automated retention where anonymisation permanently removes personal data but keeps the record for reporting.
Avoid if
- You fill most of your roles in Germany: the published board list is Nordic and global, and we found no public information on the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, German paid boards, or Google for Jobs markup.
- Your procurement or data protection officer requires a documented hosting location, a subprocessor list or a data-processing agreement before signature — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your works council or audit process needs a decision-level trail: the public pipeline documentation covers stage configuration, and we found no public information on structured scorecards or on who moved a candidate and when.
- You need retention rules administered in-product by your own admins: setup goes through your Jobylon point of contact.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Applicant management & hiring workflow | 2 of 5 |
| Multiposting, career page & candidate experience | 2 of 5 |
| Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent | 2.5 of 5 |
| AI screening transparency & control | 3.5 of 5 |
| HR handover, integrations & API | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
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
Pipelines are admin-configurable with new stages, Lost Reasons on inactive stages and Idle Applicant toggles, permissions and access control are sold for multi-team environments, and the AI assistant handles scheduling with full conversation history kept on each candidate profile. What I did not find is anything on structured scorecards, calendar integration, or a per-candidate record of who moved them between stages and why — without that, a rejection here is a decision made, not a decision I could defend. 1 3 7
The Employer Branding Manager
Configurable pipelines with admin-editable stages, lost-reason tracking and permissions for multi-team environments are documented, and the AI assistant covers interview scheduling. I found no public information on structured scorecards, calendar-connected scheduling by recruiters themselves, templated candidate emails, or any history of who moved a candidate and why — decisions get made here, but the documented record of them is not evidenced. 1 3 7
The Data Protection Officer
Configurable pipelines with admin-added stages, custom stage types and lost-reasons capture, plus permissions and access control for multi-team environments, are documented, and the AI assistant coordinates interview scheduling. We found no public information on structured scorecards, approval workflows for offers, or a per-candidate history showing who made each stage change, so the process is documented at stage level but not at decision level. 1 3 7
The Works Council Advocate
Pipelines are genuinely configurable — admins add stages, recolour them and toggle idle-applicant and lost-reason handling — alongside multi-team permissions, hiring-manager collaboration and AI-assisted scheduling, with full conversation history kept on each profile. We found no public information on structured scorecards, approval steps for offers, or a per-candidate record of who changed a stage and why, and an undocumented decision is one a works council cannot co-determine. 1 3 7
The HR IT Integrator
Configurable stages an admin can modify, lost-reason capture on inactive stages, per-team permissions and multi-brand handling give a real pipeline, and the AI assistant coordinates scheduling with recruiters able to join anytime. We found no public information on structured scorecards, requisition or offer approvals, or a per-candidate history of every stage change and who made it — the decision trail the audit anchor turns on. 1 3 7
The Skeptic
Stages are genuinely admin-configurable — add-a-stage, custom colors, lost reasons on inactive stages, idle-applicant toggles — with hiring-manager collaboration and permissions for multi-team setups. We found no public information on structured scorecards, on a record of who moved a candidate and when, or on hiring-manager access scoped to their own vacancies. 1 3
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
Multiposting is real, with named boards including Indeed, LinkedIn Premium Jobs, FINN and the Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish public employment services, plus branded career sites across brands and markets. But for filling roles in Germany I found no public information on the Bundesagentur für Arbeit or a major German paid board, on Google for Jobs markup, or on a mobile application without an account. 1 8
The Employer Branding Manager
Branded career sites and distribution to a long list of named boards are published, but the named boards and public employment services are Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish alongside global players. I found no public information on the Bundesagentur für Arbeit or a German paid board such as StepStone, Google for Jobs markup, mobile application without an account, or applicants and cost per channel — and that last number is what I buy media on. 1 8
The Data Protection Officer
Branded career sites and distribution to many named boards — Indeed, LinkedIn Premium Jobs, Stack Overflow, and the Nordic public employment services Arbetsförmedlingen, NAV and TE-Palvelut — are documented. We found no public information on the Bundesagentur für Arbeit or any major German paid board, Google for Jobs markup, mobile application, source attribution per applicant, or candidates seeing their own status and withdrawing themselves. 1 8
The Works Council Advocate
Branded career sites and multiposting to named boards are evidenced — Indeed, LinkedIn, FINN and the public employment services of Sweden, Norway and Finland. We found no public information on the Bundesagentur für Arbeit or any German paid board, on Google for Jobs markup, or on mobile application without an account, so the German candidate experience cannot be judged from these pages. 1 8
The HR IT Integrator
Branded career sites plus named board integrations — Indeed, LinkedIn Premium, FINN and the Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish public employment services — with sponsored social posting alongside. We found no public information on German boards such as the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, Google for Jobs markup, the mobile application flow, source attribution per applicant, or accessibility. 1 8
The Skeptic
Branded career sites and multiposting to named boards are real — the Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish public employment services, FINN.no, Indeed, LinkedIn Premium Jobs, Stack Overflow, and sponsored social posts. The named boards are Nordic and global, and we found no public information on German boards, Google for Jobs markup, mobile application without an account, or cost and applicants reported per channel. 1 8
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
Cleanup is automated and well documented — delete, anonymise with dummy data so reports still work, or hide, triggered a set number of months after application, after a stage move like Rejected, or when the job is archived — and there is a documented route for candidate rectification and erasure requests through the controller's features. Talent pools are marketed, but I found no public information on a consent step for storing candidates in them, on access logging, or on candidate self-service, and retention schedules are set up through your Jobylon contact rather than in the tool. 1 4 5
The Employer Branding Manager
Automated delete, anonymise and hide rules with configurable triggers — months after application, on rejection, or when a job is archived — and a documented route for candidate requests through the controller are published, and anonymisation keeps reports while permanently removing personal data. But talent-pool storage in the Talent CRM has no stated consent step, and I found no public information on access logging or candidate self-service for their own data. 4 5 1
The Data Protection Officer
Cleanup can be automated — delete, anonymise or hide a set number of months after application, after a stage move such as Rejected, or when the job is archived — and support articles document how erasure, rectification, restriction and objection requests are handled through the employer as controller. We found no public information on a consent step or expiry for the Talent CRM's talent pools, a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file, per-country retention rules, or how deletion propagates to backups and synced boards. 1 4 5
The Works Council Advocate
Automated cleanup is concrete — delete, anonymise or hide X months after application, after a rejection, or after archiving the job — and there is a documented route for rectification, erasure and restriction requests through the controller. The Talent CRM is described with no consent step, we found no public information on access logging or consent expiry, and retention rules are only set up via the vendor's point of contact, which limits what an internal body can review and change on its own authority. 1 4 5
The HR IT Integrator
Automated delete, anonymise or hide on configurable schedules — months after application, after a rejection stage move, or after job archiving — plus documented routing of rectification, erasure and objection requests through controller-side features. Talent pools are marketed with no public statement of a recorded consent step, and we found no public information on consent expiry, view or export logs, or how deletion propagates to backups and connected tools. 1 4 5
The Skeptic
Cleanup can be automated on real triggers — months after application, after a rejection, or after job archived — with an anonymise method that permanently deletes personal data while preserving reporting, plus a documented controller-side path for access, erasure, restriction and objection requests. The Talent CRM is marketed with pools, nurturing and matching, and we found no public information on a recorded consent step or its expiry; we also found none on access logging, per-country retention rules, or how deletion propagates to backups and synced tools. Retention schedules are set up via your Jobylon point of contact rather than in-product. 1 4 5
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
This is the most usable AI disclosure I have seen: inputs limited to the text of the CV and job description, demographic attributes stated to be excluded, no ranking, filtering or rejection on its own, every match overridable, switched off by default and turned on per job only on request, and an optional application-form disclaimer that lets candidates opt out of being scored at all. It stops short of what a works council needs — I found no public information on where the model runs, a published EU AI Act position, bias testing, or retained logs of AI-assisted decisions — and no public information on the model or provider behind the AI Hiring Assistant. 6 7
The Employer Branding Manager
The AI Matcher documentation tells me what it reads (CV and job description text, never demographic attributes), names an open-source embedding model that never learns from our applicants, is off by default with a per-job switch, always leaves the human to decide, and offers candidates an opt-out that blocks scoring — the hiring assistant also keeps recruiters able to join any conversation with full history on the profile. I found no public information on where the model runs, an EU AI Act position or bias testing, and informing candidates is an optional disclaimer rather than standard practice. 6 7
The Data Protection Officer
The AI Matcher is off by default and switched on per job, is documented down to its inputs (CV and job-description text only, demographic attributes excluded), its static open-source embedding model, its synthetic training data and its 0-100 score shown with an AI disclaimer, and candidates can opt out so their application is never scored. The Hiring Assistant's automated tasks are configurable and recruiters can join any conversation, but informing candidates that AI is used is described as optional, and we found no public information on where AI processing runs, a published EU AI Act position, bias testing, or retained logs of AI-assisted decisions. 6 7
The Works Council Advocate
The AI Matcher is documented the way we wish every vendor would document it: it compares only the text of the CV to the job description, demographic attributes are excluded as input, it is off by default and switchable per job, a candidate can opt out and is then not scored, it never rejects on its own, and it is a static open-source model trained on no customer applicant data. What holds it down is what we found no public information on — bias testing, retention of AI-assisted decision logs for audit, an EU AI Act position, and where the models run — plus the AI Hiring Assistant, which screens and evaluates candidates through automated conversations with no stated candidate opt-out, and a list of third-party AI screening partners with no transparency documentation. 6 7 8
The HR IT Integrator
The matcher is unusually well documented: an open-source embedding model scoring CV-to-job-ad similarity on text only, demographic attributes stated to be excluded, no customer applicant data used for training, off by default and switched on per job with human override always possible, and an optional application-form notice letting candidates opt out so they are never scored. The conversational assistant is similarly described with recruiter control and full history on the profile. We found no public information on an EU AI Act position, bias testing, or where the AI processing runs, and candidate notice is offered rather than standard. 6 7 8
The Skeptic
The AI Matcher is unusually well documented: off by default and activated per job, it reads only CV and job-ad text with age, gender and ethnicity stated as excluded, never ranks or rejects on its own, shows a 0–100 similarity score with a disclaimer, and offers a candidate opt-out that stops scoring — all on a static, open-source embedding model. It falls short of the top of the band: we found no public information on an EU AI Act position, on where the model runs, on bias testing, or on the provider behind it, and the AI Hiring Assistant page describes automation across WhatsApp, SMS and email without the same opt-out and default-state detail. Third-party AI screening tools are listed by name with their controls undetailed. 6 7 8
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
SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR and HiBob are named, with Kombo and Sympa automating new-hire data transfer into HR systems, three e-signing vendors covering offers and contracts, and a developer portal publishing an OpenAPI reference. What I could not find: Personio or DATEV-connected handover, SSO or SCIM, webhooks, published API limits, or calendar and video-interview integration, and several HR connections run through partner middleware. 1 8 9
The Employer Branding Manager
New-hire data transfer into named HR systems is well evidenced — SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, HiBob, BambooHR, with Kombo, Sympa and Harmonizer built for exactly that transfer — plus e-signature for offers and contracts via Scrive, Oneflow and GetAccept, and developer API documentation with an OpenAPI reference. I found no public information on SSO, SCIM, webhooks, published API limits, or a Personio or DATEV-connected handover. 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
Named integrations cover HR systems including SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR and HiBob, new-hire data transfer via Sympa, Kombo and Harmonizer, and e-signing via GetAccept, Oneflow and Scrive, alongside a partner API with an OpenAPI reference. We found no public information on SSO, SCIM, webhooks, published API limits, or a versioned API with a deprecation policy, so the depth of handover beyond the middleware partners' descriptions is not evidenced. 1 8 9
The Works Council Advocate
Named handover to SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR and HiBob, middleware for new-hire data transfer, e-signing through Scrive, Oneflow and GetAccept, and an OpenAPI-documented partner API give a real handover story. We found no public information on single sign-on, SCIM, webhooks, published API limits, or whether documents and consent status travel into the HR record — which is precisely what decides whether an internal candidate's application file leaks into their personnel record. 1 8 9
The HR IT Integrator
A published OpenAPI partner API and named handover to SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR, HiBob and Sympa, with e-signing through Scrive, Oneflow and GetAccept and right-to-work checks via Sistec — but several HR connections run through partner middleware like Kombo and Harmonizer rather than Jobylon itself, and I judge integrations by who maintains them. We found no public information on SSO, SCIM, webhooks, published API limits, or whether handover carries documents and consent status into the HR record rather than data alone. 1 8 9
The Skeptic
Handover is covered by named integrations — SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR, HiBob, and new-hire data transfer through Kombo and Sympa — plus e-signature from Scrive, Oneflow and GetAccept, and an OpenAPI reference presented under a partner program. We found no public information on SSO, SCIM, webhooks or published API limits, and the HR connections run through middleware partners rather than German systems the vendor maintains itself. 1 8 9
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
Jobylon AB reads as a Swedish, therefore European, contracting entity; beyond that I found no public information on hosting location, on the subprocessors — including the AI-screening and assessment partners — or on where the embedding model that scores CVs processes them. An applicant never chose this vendor, so that silence decides the score. 6 8
The Employer Branding Manager
The sovereignty record is empty apart from the Swedish vendor name, Jobylon AB. I found no public information on hosting location, on a subprocessor list covering the many integration partners and the AI chain, or on where CV matching and parsing run — and every one of those records belongs to a candidate who never chose this vendor. 6 8
The Data Protection Officer
Jobylon AB is a Swedish company, but the sovereignty record shows no attributes on file, and we found no public information on hosting location, a published subprocessor list naming the CV-parsing and AI providers, or a data-processing agreement covering applicant data. The AI Matcher article names an open-source model without stating where it runs, and the integrations pages route candidate documents through many named third parties without any processing-location statement. 6 8
The Works Council Advocate
We found no public information on hosting location, a subprocessor list, a data-processing agreement, or where the AI Matcher and the named screening, assessment and background-check partners process applicant data. The contracting entity is a Swedish limited company — the only European element visible — but with the subprocessor chain unpublished, every CV belongs to a person who never chose this vendor and cannot see where their data goes. 6 8
The HR IT Integrator
No sovereignty attributes are on record: the captured pages state no hosting location, no subprocessor list, and no statement of where the AI matcher or any CV parsing runs. The many integration partners are named on the marketplace with no processing locations given, so the chain the CVs travel cannot be reviewed from public information. 6 8
The Skeptic
We found no public information on hosting location, on subprocessors, or on where CV parsing and the AI features process data — the AI Matcher article names the model type but says nothing about where it runs. The one European element the captured material supports is the vendor itself, Jobylon AB of Sweden; the chain downstream of that is unstated while the integrations page names dozens of partners who will see applicant data. 6 8
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
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
We found no public prices at all — no tiers, no pricing basis, no job-board booking model, no minimum term; the only published path to a number is booking a 30-minute call. For a buyer, the annual invoice is not computable from what is published. 1
The Employer Branding Manager
I found no public information on any price — no tiers, no pricing basis, no job-board posting costs, no minimum term — and the only route to a number is the 30-minute call with a hiring specialist. From these pages I cannot compute what a posting on any board would add to the annual bill, which is the first number I need to defend the job-ad budget. 1
The Data Protection Officer
We found no public information on prices, tier structure, pricing basis, job-board posting costs, add-ons, minimum term or VAT treatment; the documented entry point is a 30-minute call with a hiring specialist, so an annual invoice cannot be computed from the public pages. 1
The Works Council Advocate
No public prices appear in the captured pages — no tiers, no pricing basis, no add-ons, no minimum term. The only route shown is a 30-minute call with a hiring specialist, so the annual cost is a sales conversation rather than a computable figure. 1
The HR IT Integrator
The captured material shows no prices at all — the public path is a 30-minute call and a free RFP template. We found no public information on tiers, the pricing basis, add-ons, job-board posting costs, or minimum term. 1
The Skeptic
We found no public pricing information at all — nothing on tiers, the pricing basis, job-board posting costs, add-ons or minimum term — and the captured pages route the buyer to a 30-minute call with a hiring specialist. The invoice is unknowable from public material. 1
Questions about Jobylon
Is Jobylon European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Jobylon is based.
Where does Jobylon store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does Jobylon have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Jobylon?
As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates Recruitee (3.5/5), softgarden (3/5) and Pinpoint (3/5) highest among the other 29 Recruiting products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Recruitee (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Jobylon alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- 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.
- 16 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 integrations 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
- 2 support 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 compliance 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 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
- 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 (9)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap www.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap support.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap support.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap support.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap support.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap www.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap www.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap developer.jobylon.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →