Frequently Asked Questions
Everything you need to know about the Greenhouse vs Ashby landscape.
What is the core difference in a Greenhouse vs Ashby comparison?
A Greenhouse vs Ashby comparison primarily highlights the trade-off between a mature, structured hiring ecosystem and a modern, all-in-one hiring operating system. Greenhouse is the superlative choice for organizations that require deep process control, extensive third-party integrations, and a proven methodology for reducing bias at scale. Ashby, on the other hand, is the ultimate solution for teams that want a unified platform where sourcing, CRM, and advanced analytics are natively integrated without the need for external tools. Choosing between them requires evaluating whether your team values the flexibility of a massive marketplace (Greenhouse) or the efficiency of a consolidated, data-first suite (Ashby).
Which platform offers better analytics for recruiting teams?
In the realm of data and reporting, Ashby is widely considered the best-in-class provider for native analytics. While Greenhouse offers robust reporting capabilities, many of its most advanced features and custom dashboarding options are gated behind higher-tier plans or require external BI integrations. Ashby was built with a "data-first" mindset, providing sophisticated, customizable dashboards out-of-the-box that allow recruiting operations teams to track quality-of-hire, pipeline velocity, and source effectiveness with unprecedented granularity. For organizations that rely heavily on real-time data to drive their hiring strategy, Ashby typically provides a more seamless and powerful experience.
How does the pricing compare between Greenhouse and Ashby?
Pricing structures for these two platforms cater to different market segments. Ashby offers a more transparent and accessible entry point, with its Foundations plan starting at approximately $400 per month for companies with up to 100 employees, making it an exceptionally attractive option for startups. Greenhouse utilizes a traditional enterprise quote-based model with three main tiers: Essential, Advanced, and Expert. While Greenhouse does not publish its rates, industry estimates suggest that annual contracts often start in the high four to low five figures, scaling significantly with employee count and module selection. For mid-market and enterprise firms, both vendors require custom quotes that factor in hiring volume and specific feature requirements.
Is Greenhouse or Ashby better for global enterprise operations?
Greenhouse has a longer track record of supporting massive, global enterprises with complex compliance and multi-region requirements. Its extensive marketplace of over 300 partners ensures that global firms can connect their ATS to localized payroll, background check, and assessment providers across different continents. Ashby is rapidly moving upmarket and already serves several large-scale tech companies, but Greenhouse's "safe choice" reputation and deep enterprise configurability often make it the preferred option for Fortune 500 organizations. However, for enterprises that prioritize a modern user interface and rapid product iteration, Ashby is increasingly becoming a formidable challenger in the global space.
Why should I consider MokaHR as an alternative to both?
MokaHR offers a unique value proposition as an AI-native HR SaaS platform that combines the enterprise-grade power of Greenhouse with the modern, data-driven efficiency of Ashby. As the best-in-class solution for organizations expanding globally, particularly in the APAC region, MokaHR provides deeply localized support and integrations that Western-centric platforms often lack. With Moka Eva, our proprietary AI agent, we deliver superlative automation that reduces time-to-hire by up to 63% while maintaining an 87% match accuracy. For companies that want to move beyond traditional tracking and embrace an intelligent, automated hiring future, MokaHR is the most strategic choice in 2026.