ATS for in-house teams
Primary sources checkedAshby
All-in-one recruiting platform for in-house teams: applicant tracking, sourcing CRM, scheduling and reporting in one product, priced by company size.
The short answer
- Best for
- In-house talent teams up to 100 employees
- Not ideal for
- Agencies, and companies that hire in bursts — the price follows headcount, not hiring
- Price
- USD 300 to 900 per month by company size, published up to 100 employees
- Closest alternative
- GreenhouseWhen a defined hiring process and a large integration marketplace weigh heavier than a published price
At a glance
- Recruitment fitStrong
- Ease of useUnknown
- ImplementationUnknown
- Price transparencyFair
- Value for moneyFair
- ScalabilityFair
Why these assessments
- Recruitment fitStrong
- Tracking, sourcing CRM, scheduling and reporting are one product built for in-house hiring teams.
- Ease of useUnknown
- We have not used it, and we found no independent account of how the scheduling and reporting feel in daily work.
- ImplementationUnknown
- No free plan and no published trial, and the vendor does not state what a rollout takes.
- Price transparencyFair
- Every price step up to 100 employees is published; above that, and for Plus and Enterprise, there is no number.
- Value for moneyFair
- Adding recruiters or hiring managers does not move the bill, but a company that hires rarely pays for headcount it is not hiring against.
- ScalabilityFair
- Users are unlimited within a price step, but the published ladder stops at 100 employees and enrichment is metered.
Our reading of the evidence on this page. No score, no formula.
Where it sits
- Discover
- Apply
- Screen
- ATS
- Interview
- Hire
The SourcrLab bottom line
The clearest pricing in the in-house ATS category as long as you stay under 100 employees, and a genuinely integrated reporting layer rather than an export to a spreadsheet. Cross the 100-employee line and the published prices stop, which is precisely when the contract gets large.
Best fit
Companies under 100 employees that want tracking, sourcing, scheduling and reporting in one product, and want to add recruiters or hiring managers without the bill moving.
Think twice if
Recruitment agencies, because there is no placement or billing model here, and companies that hire in bursts, because the price follows headcount rather than hiring volume.
SourcrLab assessment
Everything on this page comes from the vendor's own pages, checked on the dates below. SourcrLab has not used this product in real recruitment work, so you will not find a first-hand opinion here.
Why choose Ashby?
Priced by headcount, not by recruiter
One monthly price per company-size band. A second recruiter, a coordinator or ten hiring managers in the system do not change what you pay.
Reporting is the product, not a module
Ashby sells its analytics layer separately to companies that keep their existing ATS. A vendor that can sell its reporting on its own is a reasonable signal of where the engineering went.
Sourcing lives in the same tool
Multi-touch sequences across email and LinkedIn InMail, a sourcing Chrome extension, sourcing projects and candidate search sit inside the ATS, so outbound work does not need a second subscription.
Main trade-offs
The price steps with headcount, not hiring
A 30-person company pays USD 500 a month whether it hires two people that year or forty. Growing past a band boundary raises the bill without any change in recruiting activity.
Transparency stops at 100 employees
Plus (101 to 1,000 employees) and Enterprise (1,000+) are quote-only, described as based on company size, usage and commitment. Budget for a negotiation, not a published number.
No free plan and no published trial
Every plan, including Foundations, routes through a Get in Touch button. There is no self-serve way to try the product before a sales conversation.
Dollar pricing, and enrichment is metered
The page quotes USD from Europe, so currency and VAT are your side of the conversation. Personal email lookups run on a monthly allotment set by your plan, with extra batches sold separately.
Pricing and buying reality
USD 300 to 900 per month, by company size
- Foundations, billed monthly: 1 to 10 employees USD 300, 11 to 25 USD 400, 26 to 50 USD 500, 51 to 75 USD 700, 76 to 100 USD 900
- Annual commitment takes 10 percent off, so the same bands run USD 270 to 810 per month
- Above 100 employees: Plus and Enterprise, price on request
- Ashby Analytics, for reporting on top of an existing ATS, is priced on usage
- The vendor states that emerging market pricing is available
What we do not know
- What Plus and Enterprise actually cost
- Implementation, migration and onboarding fees
- Whether a trial or sandbox is available on request
- How the email lookup allotment is sized per plan
Checked on the vendor's pricing page, August 2026. Ashby pricing page
How it fits your stack
Works with
- Your existing ATS, if you only want the analytics layer
- Email and LinkedIn InMail, for outbound sequences
Likely replaces
- A separate interview scheduling tool
- A separate sourcing CRM for outbound pipelines
- Spreadsheet reporting built on ATS exports
May overlap with
- Standalone recruiting analytics products
- Contact data tools, for the personal email lookups it does itself
Check before buying
- What happens at the 100-employee boundary, in writing, before you sign
- Whether your outbound channels are covered by the sequence tooling
- Data export terms, and who owns the reporting history
Ashby vs alternatives
Products a buyer would genuinely put next to this one, with the reason you would pick each instead.
Choose Greenhouse if structured hiring process and a large integration marketplace matter more than seeing the price up front.
Consider Teamtailor if the career site and employer brand are the point, and unlimited users matter more than a published price.
Consider Workable if you hire occasionally and want a plan that follows the number of open jobs rather than your headcount.
Consider Recruitee if you want collaborative hiring for a smaller in-house team without the analytics depth.
Ashby head to head
Pairs SourcrLab has looked at as a single buying decision, with the trade-offs written out.
Used Ashby?
Tell other recruiters what worked, what did not, and who it suits. Positive, mixed or critical — all useful.
Evidence
- Foundations price bands — checked against a primary source: Ashby pricing page
- Annual discount and payment terms — checked against a primary source: Ashby pricing page
- Plan boundaries by company size — checked against a primary source: Ashby pricing page
- Feature availability per plan — vendor claim, not independently verified: Ashby pricing page
- Plus and Enterprise pricing — not enough evidence
- Implementation time — not enough evidence
- SourcrLab hands-on use — not enough evidence
Last reviewed: August 2026. How SourcrLab verifies information
Work at Ashby?
Email us to verify this profile or suggest a factual update.