Metaview

Three agents mean three lines on the invoice

Sourcing Pro at USD 100 per user, Notes Pro at USD 60 per user and Application Review Pro at USD 150 a month are separate purchases. For two recruiters wanting sourcing and notes, that is USD 320 a month before Application Review.

Three surfaces are priced and four are not

The product menu lists Sourcing, Outreach, Screening, Application Review, Notes, Reports and Job Posts. The pricing page has selectors for three of them. The Agentic Recruiting Platform, described as the complete suite with all agents, is quoted through sales. So the consolidation argument, which is the reason to look at Metaview rather than several point tools, is exactly the part you cannot price yourself, and neither can you price the surfaces that sit outside the three ladders.

Finding candidates is not contacting them

The vendor is straight about this and so is the documentation: the sourcing agent searches, shortlists and explains, and messages nobody. Outreach happens in Sequences, a separate surface with its own documentation, its own connected mailbox and steps somebody writes. A search can be wired to a sequence so future Yes candidates enrol automatically, but the sequence itself is still yours to build. Budget the outbound work; do not read the sourcing price as covering it.

Sourcing Pro is 200 profiles a month, and they are credits

At USD 100 per user that is 50 cents a sourced profile, and unlimited sourcing means moving to Max at USD 300 per user. The documentation adds two things the pricing page does not: those profiles are credits, spent when a completed match is returned and non-refundable even where the profile turns out to be outdated or badly matched, and contact details are a separate enrichment pool with a limited free allowance and paid top-ups. Early instant matches are free to review and do not spend credits. For a desk running several open roles, the step to Max is more likely than the entry price suggests.

“Open web” on the product page, licensed providers in the documentation

The sourcing page says the agent kicks off a web search. The support documentation says Metaview provides candidate profile data from vetted third-party providers, built from publicly available professional information and licensed from professional data providers. A licensed profile database is a reasonable thing to sell and most of this category sells one, but it is not a live crawl of the open web, and the difference shows up in coverage of people who do not keep a professional profile current. Ask which providers, and ask about your own region.

Screening at volume is a decision, not a setting

Metaview states that Application Review never auto-rejects: the agent evaluates applications and surfaces the evidence, and every accept or reject decision is a person's. That still is not a switch you turn on and forget. An agent making a first pass over 500 applications a month decides what a human looks at first, so ask how Application Review is classified for your specific use case, and write down where the human review sits, before you switch it on rather than after.

Notes still needs a bot in the call

It is an interview notetaker, so the same disclosure question applies as with any recorder: the candidate has to be told, and you need somewhere to put the recording afterwards. The free tier at 25 calls a month is a fair way to find out whether your interviewers accept it.

Retention defaults to 2 years and can be adjusted on request

The privacy page states a default retention period of 2 years and says Metaview will change it to match a customer's own policy on request. The support documentation adds that customers keep ownership of their data and decide the period, and asks you to contact the vendor to change it for your organisation. So the default is knowable before you sign anything, which is more than much of this category publishes, but the period is adjustable only through the vendor rather than from inside the product. Settle it before interviews are recorded, not after.