I search on meaning, not on the keyword you typed
Type a brief the way you'd say it to a colleague. I turn it into a semantic search across skills, trajectory and evidence, then rank every candidate by how well they actually match, not by how many words overlap.
$100 of credits on us. No card required.
Every candidate gets a real score, not a guess
I compare the brief against a candidate's actual body of work: what they shipped, owned and wrote about. The score is a percentage you can defend, and it moves the moment you change the brief.
- —Re-ranks instantly when you tighten or loosen the brief
- —Same brief always produces the same ranking
- —Every score is explainable, not a black box similarity number
I match on what someone did, not what they called it
Keyword search rewards people who happened to type the right word. I read for evidence: who actually led a payments migration versus who just has 'payments' somewhere on their profile.
- —Understands regional titles, abbreviations and adjacent roles
- —Weighs proof of work over self reported labels
- —Filters out lookalikes that only match on the surface
The same search engine behind our sourcing benchmark
Search and match is not a demo feature bolted onto a database lookup. It is the same engine that scored 97.80/100 on the independent people search benchmark, now available as a standalone matching layer you can point at any pool of candidates.
Try it on your hardest role
Most search tools do fine on an easy brief. Bring me the role you've struggled to fill and see where the ranking actually lands.
What people ask before they trust the score
Is this just semantic search with extra steps?
No. Semantic search alone still rewards surface similarity. I combine it with evidence weighting, so a person who proved the skill outranks a person who only mentioned it.
Does the ranking change if I edit the brief later?
Yes, immediately. I re-derive the whole intent, not just the keyword you changed, so a senior search stops carrying junior era candidates.
Can I see why someone scored the way they did?
Every score links back to the evidence behind it: a repository, a shipped product, a talk, a specific line in their history.
Does this replace sourcing?
Search and match is the ranking layer. Sourcing is where the candidates come from in the first place. They work together.
