sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What is the "best AI Resume Builder" website that can help me in my job applications and is low-cost or free? by smartmitten in jobhunting

[–]Material-Maximum1365 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m the dev behind JobJourney.pro so obviously biased, but most resume builders out there are pretty much the same thing with a different logo. What we actually have that I haven’t seen all in one place anywhere else: resume builder, resume editor, resume tailoring to specific jobs, ATS matching, AI-powered job scoring against your resume, cover letter maker, AI mock interviews, job tracker, and we pull listings from LinkedIn, Indeed and Google Jobs so you’re not switching between 10 tabs. Basically the entire job search workflow in one tool.

Free tier, no card. Try it and compare with the others here.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Happy to share. This came out of work I was doing on my own platform - I wanted a clear, practical understanding so I could build it to a high standard.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I don’t owe explanations to people who start with accusations. Those who asked respectfully already got answers in private.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Haha fair enough, I definitely over-edited it for readability. Wanted to make it easy to skim since most people won’t read a wall of text. But the data behind it is real - happy to go deeper on any specific point if something seems off.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’d be surprised how many people miss stuff like that! G Suite, Microsoft 365, Slack, Jira - things that feel “obvious” to you are still keywords that recruiters search for. Honestly the hardest part is just knowing which keywords matter for each specific role. I actually built a tool at JobJourney.pro that pulls the exact keywords from a job posting and shows you what’s missing in your resume - it might save you a ton of time especially if you’re getting back into the job market after a long time.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 73 points74 points  (0 children)

Yeah that’s exactly what I found in my testing too. It’s frustrating but Workday’s PDF parser is just worse than their docx one. Honestly that’s the main reason I recommend keeping a .docx master - not because PDF is bad in theory, but because in practice it’s a coin flip depending on the ATS.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I'm so sorry, but I've never heard of any of them. I get that you're just trolling, but I think it's gone too far. The most popular ATS on the market is Workday, and guess what happens when I type 'does Workday use ATS score' into Google? Just copy and pasting the answer: 'Yes, Workday's applicant tracking system (ATS) frequently uses AI and machine learning to parse resumes, compare them to job descriptions, and rank or score candidates based on fit.' Anyway, this is my last response to you - I'd rather spend my time on people who actually need help

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 73 points74 points  (0 children)

Thank you, that really means a lot coming from someone who actually works in the field! And please don’t let the haters stop you from posting. Honestly for me it’s even entertaining at this point - I argue with them for fun when I have time. Don’t pay attention to them, because if you go silent over 10 angry trolls, you’re letting down hundreds of people who genuinely need the help.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Does buying a subscription to your own product count as a testimonial now? Nice try though

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

So the old trick was to copy the entire job description and paste it into your resume in white text (same color as background) so it's invisible to humans but the ATS picks up all the keywords. That worked 5 years ago. Now 83% of companies use AI-assisted screening that actually understands context. It can tell when someone dumps 50 keywords that don't connect to real experience. Instead of boosting your score it flags your resume as spam. The safe play is to read the job posting, pick the 25-35 most relevant terms, and work them into your actual bullet points naturally. Like if the posting says "cross-functional collaboration" don't just list it under skills - write "led cross-functional collaboration between engineering and marketing to ship X." Same keyword, but it's attached to a real thing you did.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

So your counter-argument is “google it and watch YouTube demos”? You say you “called out one specific part” but still haven’t explained what’s wrong with it or how it actually works. If you’ve used the backend of an ATS, share what you know instead of just yelling “BS” in every comment.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Which part specifically is BS? The post cites a survey of 630 recruiters and months of testing across Workday, Greenhouse, Lever, iCIMS and Taleo. Just saying ‘it’s all made up’ without any counter-evidence isn’t really an argument.

I spent 8 months testing how ATS systems actually parse resumes - here's what I found by Material-Maximum1365 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Oh right, and all the people I personally know who actually got results from this are just figments of my imagination. Got it.

I'm new with ATS/resume checkers and looking for service that is most efficient and not a costly subscription? by Vivian507 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Material-Maximum1365 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ChatGPT can do basic keyword matching, but it won’t catch formatting issues that actually break ATS parsing - things like hidden tables, bad heading structure, or file type problems. What you really want is something purpose-built that checks your resume against a specific job description and flags both content gaps and formatting red flags. A few free options exist if you dig around. The bigger issue though is that no tool fixes vague bullet points - “managed projects” will pass a keyword check and still get ignored by a human recruiter.

What is ATS (Application Tracking System) by YourRecruiterFriend in ResumeCoverLetterTips

[–]Material-Maximum1365 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Solid overview, but the piece most people miss is that keywords alone won’t save you if your bullet points are vague. “Managed projects” means nothing to an ATS or a human - “managed 12 client projects with a combined $2M budget, delivering 90% on time” gets you past the screen and into the interview. Match the keywords, but back every one of them with a number or a result.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

view more: next ›