Ashby vs Greenhouse (2026): Pricing, Features and Reviews

Ashby and Greenhouse are two of the applicant tracking systems recruiters compare most in recent threads.

The short answer: choose Ashby if you want deep reporting and built-in outbound sourcing and have someone to configure it. Choose Greenhouse if consistent, scorecard-driven interviews and integrations matter most.

On price, Ashby publishes $300-$900 a month for companies up to 100 employees; Greenhouse publishes no price, and Vendr buyer data (February 2026, 884 purchases) puts the median near $26,600 a year.

Ashby is the analytics-led all-in-one: every plan includes the ATS, sourcing and CRM, direct-booking self-scheduling and core dashboards, while custom reports sit on its Plus and Enterprise tiers.

Greenhouse is the structured-hiring incumbent with the larger integration ecosystem.

Pricing, features and ratings checked October 2026 against Ashby's and Greenhouse's own pages, G2, Vendr and recent Reddit threads. Third-party figures name their source.

Ashby vs Greenhouse at a glance

Quick verdict

Ashby wins on reporting, product pace and keeping sourcing, CRM and scheduling in one system. Recruiters who use it praise the analytics more than anything else. The trade-off is setup effort: several users describe it as over-configured until someone owns it.

Greenhouse wins on structured interviewing, ecosystem size and a long enterprise track record.

Greenhouse is no longer an ATS that needs add-ons for everything: Core now includes prospecting, a CRM layer and native scheduling. Its weak spots in user reports are reporting depth and a recruiter UI some call dated.

Judge the fit by how many hires you make a year and whether you have recruiting ops support, not by headcount alone. Practitioners also suggest one test before signing either contract: check the quality of a full data export during the trial or pilot.

Pricing: what Ashby and Greenhouse actually cost

Ashby pricing

Ashby's pricing page shows one public plan, Foundations, for companies with up to 100 employees.

The price follows your total employee count, not the size of your recruiting team. The calculator opens on 11-25 employees, and many sites quote "$400 a month" from that default view.

Foundations covers the ATS, email sequences, the sourcing Chrome extension, 200 email lookups a month, self-scheduling, core dashboards and Ashby's AI assistant.

It does not include custom saved reports, custom dashboards or the AI report builder. Those sit in Plus (101-1,000 employees) and Enterprise.

Plus and Enterprise are quote-only and seat-based. Per Ashby's seat documentation, only Elevated Access and Admin users need a paid seat. Interview-only users and agency users are free, and seats can be moved between people.

Ashby publishes no per-seat price. Its docs use $795 per user per year as a worked example. Add-ons cost extra: the AI Notetaker on every plan, advanced scheduling automation on Plus, SSO on Foundations ($100 a month), and candidate data enrichment on Plus and Enterprise.

Greenhouse pricing

Greenhouse publishes no price for any of its three plans, Core, Plus and Pro. The pricing page says the quote depends on plan, hiring volume, organizational complexity and features, and every plan starts with a demo.

Third-party buyer data is the best guide. Vendr reports a median of $26,570 a year across 884 Greenhouse purchases, with deals from about $10,200 to $74,300 (updated February 2026). SpendHound puts the average for companies with 50-1,000 employees at about $29,100 (October 2026).

Older guides often quote Greenhouse from about $6,000 a year. That figure does not appear in either buyer dataset, so treat it as unreliable: the lowest of Vendr's 884 purchases was about $10,200.

A one-time implementation fee is also commonly reported. For plan-by-plan detail, see our Greenhouse pricing guide.

What buyers report paying

Real totals depend on seats, tier and contract scope. In a September 2026 r/recruiting thread on ATS costs, two solo recruiters on Ashby reported about $12,000 a year with 10 paid seats and about $16,000 with 21 seats.

In the same thread, a former Greenhouse user put their previous company's bill near $22,000 a year with everyone on a seat.

In a 2024 r/recruiting thread, one buyer at a 200-400 person company recalled Greenhouse quotes of $18,000 to $30,000 plus about $1,000 for implementation, and another reported about $29,000 at a 500-person company on a three-year contract.

These are different companies with different seat counts, so they do not prove one tool is cheaper. Some buyers have seen Greenhouse quote lower than Ashby for the same company. Get both quotes for the same seat count and contract length.

Feature-by-feature comparison

Sourcing and CRM

Ashby includes a full CRM with multi-step email sequences, a Chrome extension that pulls profiles into Ashby, 200 email lookups a month and AI outreach personalization. Leads sit in lead stages on the job and move to a Replied stage when they respond.

Greenhouse is no longer missing this layer. Core includes prospects, prospect pools, a prospecting Chrome plugin and bulk import.

Plus adds email automation, contact lookups, texting and Greenhouse Sourcing Automation. The remaining gap is depth: teams that live in outbound sequences still find Ashby's built-in tooling stronger.

Edge: Ashby, for teams where outbound sourcing is daily work. For mostly inbound hiring, the difference is small.

Interview scheduling

Ashby's direct-booking self-scheduling is on every plan, and some panel-heavy teams cite it as a reason to switch.

Advanced scheduling automation is a paid add-on on Plus and included in Enterprise. One user noted in January 2026 that Ashby cannot run several interviews at different times inside a single stage.

Greenhouse introduced its own scheduling module in May 2025 and in September 2025 added suggested interviewers, interviewer groups, scheduling-link improvements and enhanced self-scheduling.

Coordinators still report adding a separate tool to collect candidate availability (user reports, June 2026).

Edge: Ashby, though Greenhouse has closed much of the gap.

Analytics and reporting

Reporting is the most repeated reason people choose Ashby. Users describe reporting on any field and BI-style dashboards (r/recruiting, Sep 2024), and Ashby advertises drill-downs from dashboards.

Some Greenhouse teams buy Ashby Analytics, a standalone reporting product for companies with 100+ employees, instead of switching ATS (one user report, January 2026).

Two caveats. Ashby's custom reports, dashboards and AI report builder come with Plus and Enterprise, not Foundations.

Greenhouse has also invested here: interactive custom reporting in September 2025, an analytics chart agent was announced for June 2026, and AI report insights for August 2026. Users in 2026 threads still rate Greenhouse reporting lower.

Edge: Ashby, if you buy a tier that includes custom reporting.

Structured interviewing

Structured hiring is Greenhouse's founding idea: interview kits, competency-based scorecards and the same evaluation criteria for every candidate.

Teams that care most about consistent, defensible decisions tend to stay with Greenhouse, and users in comparison threads (2024-2026) cite its scorecards as the reason.

Ashby supports interview plans and scorecards too. User feedback on Ashby scorecards is thin in recent threads, so test your own scorecard and rollup workflow during the demo.

Edge: Greenhouse.

Integrations

Greenhouse lists over 400 pre-built integrations in its partner directory and says 500+ on its compare page. Ashby lists 250+ on its integrations page, with no integration fees.

Ashby's Workday integration and data-warehouse sharing are Enterprise-only, while Greenhouse's Business Intelligence Connector comes with Plus.

Edge: Greenhouse, especially for niche background-check, assessment and HRIS tools.

AI and fraud detection

Both vendors ship AI quickly. Greenhouse made Real Talent, its fraud and spam detection with CLEAR identity verification, generally available in February 2026, bought the voice-AI interviewer Ezra in May 2026 and announced an MCP server the same month.

Ashby added AI application review in 2024, fraud detection in September 2025, and AI talent rediscovery and Ashby Assistant in May 2026.

Custom AI agents and an MCP server are on every Ashby plan. Recruiters in 2026 threads treat fraud flags in either tool as signals to combine, not reasons to reject on their own.

Edge: tie. Compare the specific AI features you would use, not the count.

What users report on Reddit

We read 46 recent Reddit threads plus the threads Google ranks for this comparison. Direct head-to-head discussions are rare: none has appeared since December 2025, so most of what follows comes from wider ATS evaluations.

These are individual user reports from 2024-2026, paraphrased, with the thread and month linked.

• Reporting drives Ashby choices. It is the most cited reason to pick Ashby, and some Greenhouse teams add Ashby's analytics layer instead of migrating (r/recruiting, Jan 2026).
• Ashby's depth costs setup time. Several users call it over-configured or click-heavy, and one commenter estimated about two months of setup before migrating data from iCIMS (r/Recruitment, Dec 2025, r/recruiting, Sep 2026).
• Greenhouse divides users. Some call it the intuitive, safe choice with the best recruiter experience; others cite too many clicks, weak search and a dated recruiter UI (r/Recruitment, Feb 2026, r/humanresources, Mar 2026, r/recruiting, Jan 2026, r/recruiting, Sep 2026).
• Ashby seats can be managed. Admins can move paid licenses between users, and one buyer negotiated an annual true-up instead of paying for peak usage (r/recruiting, Feb 2025).
• Add-on charges annoy Ashby buyers, especially for AI interview summaries, but buyers also say Ashby's sales team negotiates, and one says it bought out their Greenhouse contract (r/recruiting, Dec 2025).
• Scorecard-heavy teams lean Greenhouse. Competency scorecards and structured hiring are the reasons given (r/recruiting, Sep 2024).
• Size fit follows hiring volume. Greenhouse suits larger teams with recruiting ops; Ashby runs fine for solo recruiters and small teams, though it is not built for agencies (r/recruiting, Jan 2026, r/recruiting, Sep 2026, r/Recruitment, Feb 2026, r/recruiting, Jan 2025).
• Plan the exit before you sign. One team lost data leaving Greenhouse (r/recruiting, Sep 2026), and practitioners suggest checking export quality during evaluation (r/recruiting, Sep 2026).

Ratings and implementation

Ratings from G2's Ashby vs Greenhouse comparison and Capterra, checked October 12, 2026:

Ashby's higher scores rest on far fewer reviews. Greenhouse leads G2's ATS category by G2 Score, which weighs review volume and market presence, and was named the top ATS in G2's Spring 2026 reports.

Switching from Greenhouse to Ashby

Ashby migrates Greenhouse data through the API, not CSV files. According to Ashby's migration guide, you provide Greenhouse Harvest v3 credentials (OAuth), Ashby runs an initial sync and then hourly syncs until cutover.

Greenhouse scheduled its older Harvest v1 and v2 APIs for removal on August 31, 2026, so older migration scripts and integrations built on them need the v3 credentials.

• Moves over: jobs, openings, candidates with notes and resumes, scorecards, offers, scheduled interviews, sources, tags, EEOC data, email templates (archived) and application forms.
• Does not map: user permissions, consent and retention dates, and offer-letter templates. Greenhouse prospects arrive as lead candidates.
• Timing: Ashby says the data transfer takes a day or two. For the full switch, an Ashby-hosted customer webinar (about 2023) described four to six weeks; independent first-hand timings are scarce.
• Contract overlap: Ashby says it buys out existing contracts for companies that qualify.

Before you sign either contract, run four checks: export your full candidate and stage history, have a hiring manager outside recruiting use the system for a week, rebuild one real scorecard, and test how interview invites appear on your calendar system.

Staying on Greenhouse but want better reporting? Ashby Analytics layers on top of Greenhouse or Lever without a migration. Leaving Greenhouse for a different tool? See our guide to migrating off Greenhouse.

Who should choose Ashby

• You are an in-house team and want ATS, CRM, sequences, scheduling and reporting in one system
• Outbound sourcing is a daily task, not an occasional one
• Your leadership asks recruiting questions that need custom reports, and you will buy a tier that includes them
• Someone on the team can own configuration in the first months
• You are under 100 employees and want a published price (Foundations)

Who should choose Greenhouse

• Structured interviews and competency scorecards are central to how you hire
• You run many departments or brands with a recruiting ops function
• You depend on niche integrations for background checks, assessments or HRIS
• You want a vendor with a long enterprise track record and a large user community
• You already use separate sourcing or scheduling tools you are happy with

Weighing Lever too? It is the third name in many of these evaluations. See Ashby vs Lever and Lever vs Greenhouse, or our list of Ashby alternatives.

When neither fits: a lighter ATS

Both tools assume someone will own recruiting systems and that you will book a demo before seeing the product. Small companies without that capacity often want something they can try today. That is the gap 100Hires is built for.

• Priced by company size with no per-seat fees; unlimited users and jobs on Advanced and Pro
• Our calculation from both vendors' annually billed prices at matched headcounts: Advanced costs less than Ashby Foundations at every size up to 100 employees (for example $3,588 vs $5,400 a year at 40 employees), and Pro costs more than Foundations up to 75 employees
• Start from $49 a month billed annually, covering up to 3 jobs, 100 candidates and 1 user
• Posting to 13 job boards, interview scheduling with calendar sync, AI candidate scoring and a sourcing Chrome extension
• 14-day free trial with no credit card; during the trial the account can receive up to 10 candidates from external job boards and AI use is capped

Advanced is not feature-equivalent to Foundations: Ashby bundles sourcing sequences and CRM, while 100Hires keeps contact finding and email warm-up in Pro, so compare like with like.

Detailed matchups: 100Hires vs Ashby and 100Hires vs Greenhouse. Startup teams can also read our guide to the best ATS for startups.

See plans on the pricing page or start a free 100Hires trial.

Frequently asked questions

Is Ashby cheaper than Greenhouse?

It depends on company size and seats. Up to 100 employees, Ashby Foundations costs $3,240 to $9,720 a year on a yearly term; Greenhouse is quote-only at every size, with a buyer median near $26,600. Above 100 employees Ashby is quote-only too, and some buyers have seen Greenhouse come in lower. 100Hires publishes its prices for every company size.

How much does Ashby cost?

Ashby Foundations costs $300 to $900 a month for companies with 1 to 100 employees, or 10% less on a yearly term. Plus and Enterprise are quote-only and priced by paid seats; interview-only and agency users are free. 100Hires, by comparison, prices by company size with no per-seat fees.

Does Greenhouse publish its pricing?

No. Greenhouse quotes Core, Plus and Pro after a demo. Vendr's data on 884 purchases puts the median at about $26,600 a year, with deals from about $10,200 to $74,300 (February 2026). 100Hires lists its plans publicly and offers a free trial instead of a demo-only process.

Can I use Ashby Analytics without leaving Greenhouse?

Yes. Ashby sells Analytics as a standalone product that works on top of Greenhouse or Lever for companies with 100+ employees, priced by quote. Smaller teams that mainly need pipeline and source reports can also find them built into ATS tools such as 100Hires.

How long does a Greenhouse to Ashby migration take?

Ashby says the API data transfer takes a day or two once you provide Greenhouse Harvest v3 credentials. For the whole switch, an Ashby-hosted customer webinar (about 2023) described four to six weeks. 100Hires offers free data migration on annual Pro plans.

Which is better for a small team?

In recent user threads, Ashby is the name small in-house teams mention most often: it has a published price up to 100 employees, and solo recruiters report running it, though some small teams find it too complex. Greenhouse fits larger teams with recruiting ops. Teams without anyone to configure an ATS often prefer a lighter tool such as 100Hires.