Ashby vs Greenhouse (2026)
Side-by-side comparison of Ashby vs Greenhouse: pricing, capabilities, integrations, deployment complexity, and ratings. Last updated October 28, 2026 by Heather MacAvelia.
Data sourced from The AI Agent Index
Ashby and Greenhouse are both leading applicant tracking systems, and this comparison is usually searched by talent acquisition leaders deciding between the modern challenger and the established incumbent. Ashby at $400/month for up to 100 employees is a younger ATS that has gained ground rapidly through better analytics, scheduling automation, native AI features for sourcing and interview scheduling, and a modern UX that recruiters consistently praise. It holds 4.7/5 across 113 G2 reviews. Greenhouse has custom enterprise pricing and is the more established ATS with a deeper integration ecosystem, more mature enterprise tooling, and a broader marketplace of partner integrations built over a decade. It holds 4.4/5 across 3,921 G2 reviews, reflecting its significantly larger customer base. Ashby wins on analytics depth, AI-native features, modern UX, and recruiter satisfaction. Greenhouse wins on ecosystem maturity, enterprise scale, partner integrations, and the procurement confidence that comes with 3,921 G2 reviews and years of enterprise deployments. For high-growth companies that want the most modern ATS with the strongest analytics and are comfortable with a newer vendor, Ashby is increasingly the default. For larger enterprises that need proven scalability, deep partner integrations, and a vendor with a long enterprise track record, Greenhouse remains the safer pick.
Ashby
by Ashby
All-in-one recruiting platform: ATS, CRM and sourcing, scheduling and analytics, with AI agents and a beta MCP server. Foundations from $300/mo (1-10 employees), $270 billed annually.
Best for
High-growth companies that want modern analytics, native AI features, and the best recruiter UX in the ATS category at $400/month for up to 100 employees
Greenhouse
by Greenhouse
Enterprise ATS with structured interviewing, AI recruiting and onboarding. Core, Plus and Pro plans, all quote-only. MCP server and Claude plugin in open beta.
Best for
Larger enterprises that need mature ecosystem integrations, proven scalability, and a vendor with 3,921 G2 reviews of enterprise track record
Capabilities
Ashby
Greenhouse
Pros & Limitations
Editorial assessmentAshby
Pros
- ✓Reporting is native to the ATS, with dashboards, custom reports, alerts and an AI-assisted report builder, and Ashby Analytics can also run on top of another ATS.
- ✓Ashby AI Assistant, Custom Agents and Scheduled Agents work across the product and in Slack, and a first-party MCP server in open beta connects ChatGPT, Claude and Cursor on every plan.
- ✓Foundations pricing is public by company size, from $300 a month for 1 to 10 employees or $270 billed annually, and one price covers every module with no charge for integrations.
Limitations
- –Companies past 100 employees move to the quote-only Plus or Enterprise plans, and every plan is bought through Ashby's team, with no free trial or self-serve checkout.
- –Advanced scheduling, the AI Notetaker and extra sourcing email lookups are paid add-ons, SSO costs $100 a month on the Foundations plan, and pricing is reassessed annually.
- –The MCP server is still in open beta and its tool inputs and outputs may change without notice, and the AI Interviewer is only available through an early access waitlist.
Greenhouse
Pros
- ✓Structured interviewing is built into the product, with interview kits and scorecards used across more than 7,500 companies including HubSpot, Anthropic, Gong, Coinbase and the NFL.
- ✓A partner directory of more than 400 pre-built integrations covering background checks, assessment, video interviewing, scheduling, sourcing, HRIS and collaboration, backed by published developer APIs including the Harvest, Job Board, Onboarding and Ingestion APIs.
- ✓Greenhouse MCP and the Greenhouse in Claude plugin give approved AI tools such as Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini permissioned access to live hiring data, with admins deciding which information and actions are available.
Limitations
- –Quote-only pricing across Core, Plus and Pro, with no rates published on any surface and a demo before any cost visibility, which rules Greenhouse out for buyers whose procurement requires upfront pricing comparison.
- –Greenhouse MCP and Greenhouse in Claude are both in open beta, and MCP is limited to Site Admins on the newer Core, Plus and Pro tiers.
- –Most of the value arrives only when recruiting teams adopt the structured interviewing method, which takes process change and recruiter training, G2 reviewers report about two months to implement, and Voice AI is sold as a separate annual subscription.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between Ashby vs Greenhouse?
Ashby and Greenhouse are both leading applicant tracking systems, and this comparison is usually searched by talent acquisition leaders deciding between the modern challenger and the established incumbent. Ashby at $400/month for up to 100 employees is a younger ATS that has gained ground rapidly through better analytics, scheduling automation, native AI features for sourcing and interview scheduling, and a modern UX that recruiters consistently praise. It holds 4.7/5 across 113 G2 reviews. Greenhouse has custom enterprise pricing and is the more established ATS with a deeper integration ecosystem, more mature enterprise tooling, and a broader marketplace of partner integrations built over a decade. It holds 4.4/5 across 3,921 G2 reviews, reflecting its significantly larger customer base. Ashby wins on analytics depth, AI-native features, modern UX, and recruiter satisfaction. Greenhouse wins on ecosystem maturity, enterprise scale, partner integrations, and the procurement confidence that comes with 3,921 G2 reviews and years of enterprise deployments. For high-growth companies that want the most modern ATS with the strongest analytics and are comfortable with a newer vendor, Ashby is increasingly the default. For larger enterprises that need proven scalability, deep partner integrations, and a vendor with a long enterprise track record, Greenhouse remains the safer pick.
Which is best for my team: Ashby vs Greenhouse?
Ashby is best for: High-growth companies that want modern analytics, native AI features, and the best recruiter UX in the ATS category at $400/month for up to 100 employees. Greenhouse is best for: Larger enterprises that need mature ecosystem integrations, proven scalability, and a vendor with 3,921 G2 reviews of enterprise track record.
How does pricing compare between Ashby vs Greenhouse?
Ashby uses a subscription model, starting at $270 per month on an annual commitment (month-to-month costs more). Greenhouse uses a custom model with pricing on request.
View full Ashby profile
Pricing, reviews, integrations →
View full Greenhouse profile
Pricing, reviews, integrations →
More in this category
Related guides
AI Agent Price & Rating Tracker
Free, every two weeks. Price changes, new agent launches, acquisitions, and rating updates across the AI agent market. Verified against live vendor data, not vendor marketing.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We never share your email. Read past issues