Allsorter

“Liked the uniform layout it produces, which rarely needs further tweaks before sending. Found it struggles with candidates who held several roles at the same employer.”

“Liked how much editing time it saves when preparing candidate CVs for clients. Found that the interface sometimes scrolls back up unexpectedly while working on a document.”

“Liked the fast and accurate conversion and how easy it is for entry-level staff to learn. Found that text boxes can be hard to move and position.”

“Liked how customizable the output is and how responsive the support team has been. Found that it occasionally removes location names from candidate work history.”

“Liked the fast parsing and the consistent, company-standard CVs it produces for clients. Found that users cannot customize the template much on their own without vendor help.”

“Liked that it cut CV formatting time from about fifteen minutes to under five per candidate. Found that output still needs some finishing before it goes to clients.”

“Liked the intuitive tool, simple dashboard, and attentive team behind it. Found that the phone number shown on a CV cannot be edited in the candidate profile.”

“Liked the integration with the agency's ATS and the quick, informative CVs it creates for clients. Noted no major drawbacks during regular use.”

“Liked the speed and functionality of the tool and the responsive team supporting it. Noted no major drawbacks so far, with the template still being fine-tuned.”

“Liked the significant time savings on CV preparation and the helpful support received along the way. Noted no major drawbacks in day-to-day use.”

“Liked how easy it is to use and the standardized CVs it produces for the team. Found occasional formatting issues, usually caused by the original CV layout.”

“Liked that it converts PDF resumes to Word with acceptable results for client submissions. Found that the skills field sometimes shows random names that need removing.”

“Liked how easy it is to move CVs into the software for processing. Found that parsing sometimes removes key information, forcing manual retyping of candidate details.”

“Liked the better CV quality, faster preparation, and ongoing product updates. Found that some candidate layouts do not adapt well, with occasional missing letters or italics.”

“Liked the time it saves, the consistent CVs it creates, and the training provided during setup. Found that the skills section is not always carried over from the original CV.”

“Liked that it copies most of the content from a candidate CV. Found poor formatting and misplaced information, making manual formatting faster in many cases.”