Recruiting
Recruitee
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 3 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Recruitee B.V. · recruitee.com
Compare with Teamtailor → 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
Recruitee is a customizable hiring software/ATS from Recruitee B.V. of Amsterdam, part of the Tellent group, with Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf contracting for customers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The bench scored it strongest on integrations and handover (4 to 5) and sovereignty (4 to 6): API, webhooks, digital offer letters with e-signatures and HRIS integrations are stated publicly, and the privacy policy commits that Tellent will never transfer processor data outside the EU unless the customer instructs it. That sovereignty spread reflects emphasis rather than facts — the higher scores credit the European contracting chain, the lower ones that we found no public information on hosting or a subprocessor list for the applicant-data chain. Weakest is AI screening control (0 to 2): Screening and Matching Assistants are sold by monthly credits and searches, and we found no public information on what they evaluate, the provider, or whether each can be switched off. Candidate pipeline sits at 2 to 3 on marketing-level workflow claims; the pricing page shows euro signs with no numeric prices.
Speaks for it
- European contracting entities, with Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf covering Germany, Austria and Switzerland and Teamrise SAS covering France or Luxembourg.
- A privacy-policy commitment that Tellent will never transfer processor data outside the European Union unless the customer instructs it.
- API, webhooks, digital offer letters with e-signatures, HRIS integrations and pre-onboarding are stated publicly, with a 30-day API export window after termination.
- Published retention and exit terms: data kept for up to 365 days, deletion 30 days after termination, and data-subject rights from access to portability.
- A career-site builder, multichannel job posting and WhatsApp hiring are evidenced, with "Powered by" branding removable from the careers site.
Held against it
- The AI Screening Assistant and Matching Assistant are sold by monthly credits and searches (one tier lists 3 matching searches and 100 screening credits a month), and we found no public information on what they evaluate, the provider, or per-feature switches.
- We found no public information on pipeline stages per job, structured scorecards, hiring-manager permissions, or any record of who changed a candidate's stage.
- We found no public information naming a German job board, on Google for Jobs markup, or on source attribution per applicant.
- We found no public information on automatic deletion after rejection, talent-pool consent with expiry, or a log of who viewed an applicant file.
- We found no public information on hosting infrastructure or a subprocessor list for the applicant-data chain, and the Tellent group includes a US entity.
Best for
- You want a European contracting chain — Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf for Germany, Austria and Switzerland — with a published commitment that processor data never leaves the EU unless you instruct it.
- You need open hooks to wire hiring into your own stack, with API, webhooks, e-signature offer letters and HRIS integrations stated publicly.
- You are building a career site with multichannel job posting and WhatsApp as a candidate channel.
Avoid if
- You must document AI screening to a works council or DPO before signing, and need to know what the assistants evaluate and how to switch each one off.
- You need a documented decision trail — pipeline stages per job, structured scorecards, who changed what — rather than marketing-level workflow claims.
- You need a computable annual price before talking to sales — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
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 homepage sells customizable hiring software with workflow automation and collaboration, real-time custom dashboards and WhatsApp hiring, but every captured claim stays at marketing level: we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, hiring-manager permissions, structured scorecards, interview scheduling, or a history of who moved a candidate and why. I hire sixty people a year across three sites and need a decision I can defend; nothing captured evidences one. 1 5
The Employer Branding Manager
The homepage promises workflow automation with collaboration, real-time reporting dashboards and WhatsApp hiring, but we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, structured scorecards, interview scheduling or any record of who decided what. The mechanics my hiring managers would live in daily are left to the demo. 1 5
The Data Protection Officer
The homepage markets customizable hiring software with workflow automation, collaboration, and real-time reporting dashboards, but we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, structured scorecards, interview scheduling, or any record of who decided what. For my purposes the decisive gap is decision attribution: nothing captured shows a per-candidate history of stage changes and who made them. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The captured pages name customizable hiring software, workflow automation, collaboration and reporting dashboards in general terms, but we found no public information on configurable stages per job, structured scorecards, hiring-manager access limited to their own vacancies, or a history of who changed what and when. A decision trail the public pages do not document cannot yet be the subject of a co-determination agreement. 1 5
The HR IT Integrator
Workflow automation with custom workflows and real-time reporting dashboards are marketed, but we found no public information on pipeline stages per vacancy, structured scorecards, interview scheduling, or any record of who changed a candidate's stage. As the one wiring hiring managers and calendars into this, I cannot see from the captured pages what I would actually be connecting to. 1
The Skeptic
The homepage sells "workflow automation & collaboration" and real-time reporting dashboards, but we found no public information on pipeline stages per job, hiring-manager permissions, structured scorecards, or any history of who decided what. The daily workflow is marketing copy, not documentation. 1 2
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 site builder, multi-channel job posting tools and a removable powered-by badge on the careers site are evidenced, so the funnel exists in name. But we found no public information on which German boards are reached, whether postings are booked from inside the system, source attribution per applicant, or a mobile application without an account — exactly what decides whether I keep a separate multiposting contract. 1 5
The Employer Branding Manager
A career-site builder and multichannel job posting are named front and centre, and the powered-by branding can be removed from the career site, but we found no public information on which German job boards are covered, Google for Jobs markup, or whether a candidate can apply on a phone without creating an account. As the buyer of the career page and the channel budget, I see no named board and no candidate mobile path I can evaluate. 1 5
The Data Protection Officer
A career site builder, multichannel job posting, and WhatsApp hiring are stated on the homepage. We found no public information on named German job boards, Google for Jobs markup, a mobile application flow without an account, source attribution per applicant, or candidates viewing their own status, so this sits at the level of a basic career page and distribution claim with no German market specifics captured. 1
The Works Council Advocate
A career site builder, multi-channel job posting and WhatsApp hiring are stated, with branding removable from the careers site guaranteed in the terms, but no German job boards are named and we found no public information on Google for Jobs markup, mobile application without an account, source attribution per applicant, or accessibility of the career page. 1 5
The HR IT Integrator
A career-site builder, multi-channel job-posting tools and WhatsApp as a candidate channel are evidenced, but we found no public information naming any German job board, on Google for Jobs markup, or on what applying on a phone looks like. Without the Bundesagentur für Arbeit or a major German board being named, this does not read as multiposting for the German market. 1
The Skeptic
A career site builder and a promise to "put every job in front of the right audience" are what the captures show, plus a terms-level detail that "Powered by" branding can be hidden on the careers site. We found no public information on named German job boards, Google for Jobs markup, mobile application, or source attribution per applicant. 1 5
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 privacy policy states data is kept for up to 365 days with more detail on request, lists access, erasure and portability rights with a postal route to the Data Protection Office, and the terms promise deletion and an API export window of thirty days after termination. On the employer-side machinery we found no public information on configurable automatic deletion after rejection, talent-pool consent with expiry, or a log of who viewed an applicant file. 3 5
The Employer Branding Manager
The captured pages state data is kept up to 365 days without saying that figure applies to applicants processed for customers, subscriber content is deleted 30 days after termination with an API export in the same window, and the data-subject rights list is published. We found no public information on a configurable automatic deletion after rejection, talent-pool consent with expiry, or a log of who viewed an applicant file. 3 5
The Data Protection Officer
The privacy policy states data is kept "for up to 365 days", lists access and erasure rights, and says more retention detail is available on request; the terms allow API export and deletion thirty days after termination. We found no public information on deletion running automatically after rejection on a configurable date, talent-pool consent with expiry, an access log over applicant files, or logged deletion runs — exactly the parts the employer is liable for. 3 5
The Works Council Advocate
The privacy policy keeps data for up to 365 days and the terms delete content 30 days after termination, but we found no public information on automatic deletion after a configurable period following rejection, on talent-pool storage with recorded and expiring consent, or on a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file. Retention details are available only on request, which a works council cannot review in advance. 3 5
The HR IT Integrator
Retention is stated (up to 365 days, and deletion 30 days after contract termination with a 30-day API export window), data-subject rights from access to portability are documented, and more retention detail is offered on request — but we found no public information on automatic deletion after rejection on a configurable deadline, on talent-pool consent, or on any log of who viewed an applicant file. That is the part the employer is liable for, and it is not public. 3 5
The Skeptic
What is public is fixed rather than configurable: data is "kept by Tellent for up to 365 days" and content is deleted 30 days after contract termination. We found no public information on automatic deletion after rejection, talent-pool consent with expiry, or any log of who viewed or exported an applicant file. 3 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
An AI-powered Screening Assistant and Matching Assistant are metered by monthly credits and searches per plan, so I know they exist and how they are packaged — and nothing more: we found no public information on what they evaluate, whether they can be switched off per account, whether a human confirms every rejection, or which model provider runs them. The terms exclude IP indemnity for AI-generated content, which confirms AI is at work in the service without giving me anything I could bring to a works council. 1 2 5
The Employer Branding Manager
An AI-powered Screening Assistant and Matching Assistant are sold with monthly credit and search quotas, but we found no public information on what they evaluate, where the models run, whether each can be switched off, or who the provider is; the one governance statement I found says the vendor gives no intellectual-property indemnity for AI-generated content. Recruitment AI is high-risk under the EU AI Act, and none of that is addressed on these pages. 1 2 5
The Data Protection Officer
An AI-powered Screening Assistant and Matching Assistant are marketed with monthly credit limits per tier, and the terms decline IP indemnity for AI-generated content; we found no public information on what these features evaluate, their inputs or model provider, per-feature switches, any statement that humans decide, or an EU AI Act position. Marketing with usage quotas and no captured transparency content puts this at the bottom of the scale for a high-risk use. 1 2 5
The Works Council Advocate
The Screening Assistant is sold in monthly credits and the Matching Assistant in monthly searches, marketed as hiring smarter and faster, and we found no public information on what these tools evaluate, which inputs they read, where the models run, whether candidates are informed, or whether each feature can be switched off. Selling an automated ranking of applicants by quota, with no named provider and nothing stated to be off by default, is precisely the high-risk case. 1 2 5
The HR IT Integrator
A Screening Assistant and a Matching Assistant are sold with monthly credit and search quotas per plan, and the terms exclude IP indemnity for AI-generated content, but we found no public information on what the models evaluate, which provider runs them, whether a human decides, or whether each feature can be turned off. An undisclosed score next to a candidate's name is what a works council will ask me to defend, and the captured pages give me nothing to answer with. 1 2 5
The Skeptic
The pricing page sells a "Matching Assistant" and a "Screening Assistant" by the search and by the credit, yet we found no public information on what they evaluate, where the models run, whether they can be switched off, or who the provider is; the terms also state no IP indemnity for AI-generated subscriber content. Recruitment AI is high-risk under the EU AI Act, and nothing captured would support a works-council conversation. 1 2 5
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
Integrations, APIs and webhooks are marketed on the homepage, digital offer letters come with eSignatures, and HRIS integrations and pre-onboarding are named as modules, with an API export window of thirty days after termination in the terms. But we found no public information naming a specific HR or payroll system used in DACH that a hire flows into without retyping, no calendar or video-interview integration, no SSO or SCIM, and no published API limits. 1 5
The Employer Branding Manager
APIs, webhooks, HRIS integrations, digital offer letters with e-signatures, pre-onboarding and single sign-on across the vendor's own product family are all claimed publicly. We found no public information naming which HR systems the handover carries data into — not Personio, DATEV-connected systems or SAP SuccessFactors — nor on published API limits or SCIM. 1 3 5
The Data Protection Officer
API, webhooks, integrations, HRIS integrations, digital offer letters with e-signatures, and pre-onboarding are all stated, and the terms promise API export of content after termination. We found no public information naming any HR or payroll system in DACH that the handover reaches, on published API limits, or on customer SSO or SCIM — the single-login statement covers only the vendor's own SaaS products. 1 3 5
The Works Council Advocate
Integrations, APIs and webhooks, HRIS integrations, pre-onboarding and digital offer letters with eSignatures are stated, and the group's own HR system sits under the same terms; we found no public information on handover by name to HR systems common in DACH, on single sign-on and SCIM for the customer, or on published API limits. Nothing shows whether an internal candidate's file is kept out of the personnel record after handover. 1 3 5
The HR IT Integrator
An API, webhooks and e-signature for offer letters are evidenced, and HRIS integrations exist as a named module — but no HR system is named on the captured pages (we found no public information on Personio, DATEV-connected systems or SAP SuccessFactors), and nothing on API documentation or published limits, calendar integration, customer SSO or SCIM. Single sign-on is documented only across the vendor's own SaaS products, not into the customer's identity provider, so I cannot say who maintains a German handover or whether the hire arrives with its documents rather than as a retyped PDF. 1 3 5
The Skeptic
API, webhooks, e-signatures and generic "HRIS integrations" are stated on the homepage and in the terms. We found no public information naming a German or DACH HR or payroll system, on SSO and SCIM, or on published API limits, so the handover of a hire cannot be traced before signing. 1 5
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 structure is genuinely European: Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf contracts for Germany, Austria and Switzerland, with a Dutch and a French entity for other regions, and the privacy policy commits that personal data processed for customers is never transferred outside the EU unless the customer instructs it. What caps this is the unverifiable chain: we found no public information on the hosting infrastructure, and the only subprocessors named are Sympa and a list of advertising platforms — no parsing, AI or email-delivery providers for the applicant-data chain. 3 5
The Employer Branding Manager
Customers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland contract with Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf, French customers with Teamrise SAS, and the vendor states it will never transfer processor data outside the European Union unless the customer instructs it — a genuinely European contracting setup. But we found no public information on the hosting infrastructure, or on the parsing, AI and email-delivery providers in the processing chain; the published subprocessor material covers advertising partners and Sympa. 3 5
The Data Protection Officer
Customers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland contract with Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf, other regions with other EU entities, and the privacy policy states processor data is never transferred outside the European Union unless the customer instructs it, while the same policy also describes standard contractual clauses for transfers outside the EU. Hosting location is unstated, and we found no public subprocessor list naming a CV parser or the AI provider behind the screening and matching features — the processor names captured relate to the vendor's own marketing and administration. 3 5
The Works Council Advocate
Contracting entities are European, with Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf covering Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and Tellent commits that customer data it processes as a processor never leaves the EU unless instructed; we found no public information on where the service is hosted, on named infrastructure, or on a subprocessor list covering CV parsing, email delivery and the AI assistants, and the group also includes a US entity. 3 5
The HR IT Integrator
The contracting entity for German, Austrian and Swiss customers is Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf, the customer is controller with Tellent as processor, and the privacy policy pledges processor data will never leave the EU unless the customer instructs it — but we found no public information on where the SaaS is hosted or on a service subprocessor list; the processors named in the privacy policy are advertising platforms for the vendor's own marketing. With the location of AI screening and any CV parsing also silent, the contracting chain is European while the infrastructure chain stays unpublished. 3 5
The Skeptic
The contracting route is genuinely European: Recruitee B.V. in Amsterdam, Recruitee GmbH in Düsseldorf for customers in Germany, Austria or Switzerland, and a privacy-policy commitment that processor data is never transferred outside the EU unless instructed. But we found no public information on hosting infrastructure, ownership, or a subprocessor list for the SaaS itself — the captures name advertising platforms and Sympa for Tellent's own marketing — and the group includes a US entity. 3 4 5
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
The commercial mechanics are public and unusually detailed — pricing per number of employees with an automatic upgrade to the next tier at then-current list prices, yearly terms renewing automatically unless notice is given ninety days in advance, fees in EUR, USD or GBP exclusive of taxes and billed thirty days in advance. But the captured pricing page shows tier names, plan descriptions and AI credit counts with euro signs and no numbers, so an annual invoice is not computable from public pages alone. 2 5
The Employer Branding Manager
The captured pricing page shows plan tiers with euro signs and AI quotas (three matching searches and 100 screening credits a month on one tier) but no figures in the captured text, so no actual price is public, while the terms do reveal the model: per number of employees, yearly auto-renewing with 90 days' notice, fees exclusive of taxes, and automatic tier upgrade at then-current list prices. We found no public information on job-board posting costs — the exact line item I read a pricing page for. 1 2 5
The Data Protection Officer
The pricing basis per number of employees, the yearly default term with a ninety-day non-renewal notice, tax-exclusive fee treatment, currencies, and per-tier AI credit limits are public, and agencies are told to request a custom quote. The captured pricing page shows euro signs only, with no numeric price in the captured text, so an actual invoice figure cannot be derived from the public pages. 2 5
The Works Council Advocate
The terms state the basis — a maximum number of employees with auto-upgrade at then-current list prices — together with the yearly default term, automatic renewal, 90-day non-renewal notice, fees exclusive of all taxes, and EUR, USD or GBP; the captured pricing page itself shows euro signs only with no numeric prices, and we found no public information on job-board posting costs or add-on prices. The annual invoice is not computable from public pages. 2 5
The HR IT Integrator
The captured pricing page gives tier names, plan quotas and euro signs only, with no numeric prices in the captured text, while the terms at least publish the basis (per number of employees, with auto-upgrade on exceeding it), the yearly default term with auto-renewal, the 90-day non-renewal notice, advance billing, CPI indexation and taxes-exclusive fees. The shape of the invoice is public; the amount is a sales conversation. 2 5
The Skeptic
The captured pricing page shows plan names, per-plan AI quotas and euro signs, but no numeric prices, and agencies are told to contact us for a custom quote. The terms do publish the commercial frame — fees per number of employees with auto-upgrade at then-current list prices, default yearly auto-renewal with 90 days' non-renewal notice, all fees exclusive of taxes — but a buyer still cannot compute the invoice. 2 5
European sovereignty — proven facts
3 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 ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 4 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | EU only ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 6 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 12 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 — Legal entity. The same imprint and the terms also name sister entities Recruitee GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) and Recruitee Inc., so the contracting entity may differ by customer.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. The EU-only statement appears on a GDPR marketing page rather than in the terms or the DPA excerpt, which do not state a hosting region or default.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. The Intercom badge sits on the help-center site and names no data categories, and the subprocessor list referenced as DPA Appendix 3 in the terms is not shown, so other processors remain unnamed.
- 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.
- 42 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
- 4 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
- 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
- 3 legal 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 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
- 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
- 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 (16)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage recruitee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page recruitee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy recruitee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice recruitee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service recruitee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Security / trust page recruitee.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 7 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap support.recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap support.recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Multiposting, career page & candidate experience — found from sitemap recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Multiposting, career page & candidate experience — found from sitemap support.recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap support.recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap support.recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap support.recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 16 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap recruitee.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →