You don't need another "modern" tool while you're drowning in resumes and juggling calendars. You need video interview software that takes a noisy applicant pool and helps you figure out who's worth a real conversation fast.
This guide covers async vs. live interviews, how ATS integrations actually work, a 2026 vendor comparison with honest tradeoffs, and a decision framework you can use this week.
What to look for in video interview software
Before you compare platforms, know what actually matters for how your team hires. Most feature lists are long on buzzwords and short on workflow impact.
These are the capabilities that separate tools you'll use from tools you'll abandon in a month.
- Structured evaluation. Built-in rubrics, scorecards, and anchored rating scales so every reviewer applies the same standards. Without this, you're just collecting videos in a folder. The best video interview software makes comparison easy, not just collection.
- AI that supports your review — not replaces it. Transcription, summaries, and match scoring that help you review faster. Look for reasoning behind every score so you can evaluate the AI's work, not just trust it. Avoid platforms where AI is a black box.
- ATS integration that actually syncs. "Integrates with Greenhouse" can mean real-time bi-directional sync or a pasted link. You need invite triggers, completion status updates, results write-back, and disposition sync. If the vendor can't demo the full loop for your ATS, expect manual work.
- Candidate experience. Mobile-first, browser-based (no app downloads), clear instructions, reasonable time limits, and prep time before recording. A clunky candidate experience tanks your completion rate — and your employer brand.
- Setup speed. How long from sign-up to a live job with real candidates? Self-serve tools can get you there in minutes. Enterprise platforms may take weeks. Know which lane you're in.
- Pricing transparency. Can you find the price without a sales call? Do you know what's included at your tier and what costs extra? Surprises at contract time are a red flag.
Two formats, one decision
- One-way (asynchronous): Candidates record answers to structured questions on their own schedule. Your team reviews in batches — transcripts, summaries, and scores instead of live calls. Best for high-volume screening where phone screens are the bottleneck.
- Live: Real-time video with back-and-forth conversation, built-in notes, and structured scoring. Best for final rounds, technical deep-dives, stakeholder alignment, and closing.
Most teams need both. Use asynchronous interviews to narrow the field, then live to go deep with the candidates who earned a real conversation.
Why it's not just Zoom or Teams
Video interview software adds structure (same questions for every candidate), scoring (built-in rubrics for consistent comparison), and workflow (invites, reminders, audit trails, and ATS handoffs). Zoom helps you meet. This helps you screen and decide.
When to use each format
One-way (async) interviews work best when candidates get a link, record answers to 3–6 questions with time limits, and submit. Your team reviews on your schedule — not theirs. This is where teams reclaim the most time. Instead of scheduling and sitting through calls to find out someone can't work weekends, you review a transcript in a couple of minutes and move on.
Best for: hourly roles, customer support, sales development, healthcare staffing, franchise hiring, seasonal spikes — anywhere phone screens have become calendar Tetris.
Live interviews work best for synchronous conversation, typically 30–60 minutes. Use live when you need real interaction: final rounds, technical deep-dives, role plays, stakeholder conversations, and closing. It captures nuance you can't get asynchronously — collaboration style, reasoning under pressure, how someone handles follow-up questions.
The hybrid approach that works
Async to shortlist, live to decide.
Screen with 4–5 structured questions mapped to your rubric. Review transcripts, summaries, and scores to identify who's aligned. Then run live interviews only with candidates who've already demonstrated they're worth your time.
Go heavier on async when you have high volume, lean recruiting capacity, or multiple locations. Go heavier on live for high-ambiguity roles, on-the-fly problem solving, or leadership hires.
2026 video interview software comparison
We reviewed platforms across SMB and enterprise use cases, testing end-to-end flows (invite → candidate experience → review → collaboration → ATS handoff) and common edge cases (mobile completion, slow connections, multiple reviewers, high-volume batches).
Each tool was evaluated on ATS integration quality, AI capabilities, candidate UX, pricing transparency, setup time, and team fit. Pricing changes often — verify with the vendor before you commit.
Methodology note: Evaluations are based on publicly available product information, vendor demos, and documented feature sets as of Q1 2026. We focused on the workflows that matter most to lean TA teams and staffing agencies doing high-volume screening. Truffle is our product — we've flagged that clearly and included honest limitations.
| Platform | Best for | Async | Live | AI review support | ATS integration depth | Pricing model | Setup time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Truffle | Growing companies hiring across multiple departments that need to screen every applicant without phone-screening all of them | Full (core product) | No native live | AI-assisted candidate summaries and match scores, transcripts/search, Candidate Shorts highlight reels, structured evaluation, AI-resistant assessments (IPIP Big Five Personality, Situational Judgment, Environment Fit) | Native integrations + Zapier/API. Auto-invites on stage change, writeback of transcripts and scores | $149/month ($99/month paid annually). Unlimited users. Free 7-day trial | 10–15 minutes |
| Spark Hire | SMB/mid-market teams wanting async + live in one tool | Yes | Yes | Varies by plan — confirm AI depth for your tier | Often via partner connectors — verify true sync vs. link-only for your ATS | Subscription tiers, varies by seats/usage | 1–3 days |
| HireVue | Enterprise TA running global, high-volume programs with compliance requirements | Yes | Yes | Integrated assessments and workflow automation | Major enterprise ATS/HCM via native or partner connectors | Quote-based enterprise packages. Factor in professional services and compliance workstreams | 4–12 weeks |
| VidCruiter | Mid-market to enterprise teams needing configurable multi-stage workflows | Yes | Yes | Standardized evaluation tools | Often sold with integration support — verify sync depth | Quote-based, depends on modules and volume | 2–6 weeks |
| Willo | Teams prioritizing polished candidate UX for async with lightweight collaboration | Yes | No | Lightweight | Often via Zapier or webhooks | Tiered by jobs/seats/volume | 30–90 minutes |
| myInterview | Small HR teams hiring across many roles who want approachable video screening | Yes | No | Lightweight | Commonly link-based or automation-driven | Transparent tiers — confirm caps | 15–60 minutes |
| interviewstream | Teams needing structured, repeatable interview processes at scale | Yes | Yes | Standardized documentation tools | Varies by ATS and package | Quote-based | 2–8 weeks |
| Jobma | Volume teams wanting async + supporting features without enterprise complexity | Yes | Limited | Basic collaboration tools | Often positioned with ATS connectivity — confirm your specific system | Subscription-based — confirm per-seat vs per-interview | 1–5 days |
| Hireflix | Teams with existing rubrics who want a clean, focused async tool | Yes | No | Minimal | Often via links and automations | Straightforward subscriptions | Same day |
Where each platform wins
Truffle wins on speed-to-signal for growing companies hiring across multiple departments. It helps you screen every applicant without phone-screening all of them by combining async video (Candidate Shorts) with AI-assisted summaries, transcripts, and match scores that explain why someone looks like a fit. Then the AI-resistant assessments add the missing layer: personality tendencies (IPIP Big Five), situational judgment, and environment fit, so you’re not just measuring what a candidate can say on camera, but how they’re likely to operate day to day. The result is a ranked, evidence-backed shortlist in minutes, with structured evaluation your team can align on before you invest time in live calls.
Where Truffle falls short: No native live interviewing. If you need async and live in one platform, you'll pair Truffle with another tool for final rounds.
Spark Hire wins on format flexibility. Async and live in one tool with team collaboration. If your team wants a single platform covering both screening and final-round conversations, Spark Hire handles both without juggling vendors. Good option for mid-market teams that don't want enterprise complexity but need more than pure async.
HireVue wins on global enterprise infrastructure. If you're running hiring programs across multiple regions, business units, and compliance regimes, HireVue has the governance and scale. Integrated assessments, workflow controls, and administration tools built for large-program management. The implementation investment matches — plan for weeks, not days.
VidCruiter wins on workflow configurability. Multi-stage interview processes with standardized evaluation across departments. Strong for organizations that need auditable, repeatable processes and want control over exactly how interviews flow. More configuration than lightweight tools, which is a feature if you need it and overhead if you don't.
Willo wins on candidate experience. Clean, polished async interface that candidates actually enjoy using. Fast to adopt and easy for reviewers. If candidate UX is your top priority and you need lightweight async without deep AI, Willo delivers.
myInterview wins on simplicity. If you're a small HR team hiring across many roles and want video screening without a learning curve, myInterview gets you there fast. Easy sharing and lightweight review. Less depth in structured scoring, but the tradeoff is speed of adoption.
Hireflix wins on focused simplicity. Clean async tool that does one thing well. If you already have rubrics and evaluation processes and just need a reliable way to collect structured video responses, Hireflix stays out of your way.
Pricing models and what to watch for
Here are the four video interview pricing models.
Per-user pricing is predictable for stable teams but can penalize collaboration if adding reviewers costs extra. Ask whether hiring managers count as seats.
Per-interview or per-candidate pricing works for seasonal spikes and variable volume. Risky if a busy month blows your budget. Confirm how "interview" is defined (started vs. completed) and whether retakes count.
Unlimited / flat-rate pricing is best for consistent high volume. Check for fair-use caps, storage limits, and whether "unlimited" applies to jobs, candidates, users, or all three.
Per-job pricing means you pay for each active job posting with interviews enabled. Good if you hire for a few roles at a time; expensive if you run many concurrent requisitions.
What to ask before you buy
- Feature gating: Which capabilities are included at your tier and which cost extra? Common upsells: ATS write-back, AI-generated summaries and scores, branded experiences, SSO, analytics, and premium support.
- Implementation fees: Self-serve tools usually have none. Enterprise platforms may charge for onboarding, configuration, integration build, and training. Get a number, not "we'll scope it."
- Overage pricing: What happens when you exceed your plan's volume — per-interview charges, automatic tier upgrades, or throttling?
- Contract terms: Monthly vs. annual commitment, cancellation terms, and what happens to your data (recordings, transcripts, scores) if you leave.
- Total cost of ownership: Beyond the license, factor in integration maintenance, internal admin time, compliance workstreams (if AI evaluation triggers regulatory requirements in your jurisdiction), and the cost of scaling to additional roles and locations.
The cheapest tool isn't always the best deal. A platform that costs more but gets you from applicant to shortlist in a day — with clean ATS data and structured evaluation — often pays for itself in recruiter hours within the first month.
ATS integrations: What to verify before you sign
This is where buying decisions go wrong. "We integrate with your ATS" can mean real-time bi-directional sync or a pasted link. Confirm the actual workflow for your ATS before you commit.
Four handoffs to validate
- Invite trigger: Does an ATS stage change automatically send the interview invite — or does a recruiter do it manually?
- Completion sync: Does the candidate's completion status update in the ATS in real-time?
- Results write-back: Do transcripts, scores, summaries, and interview links land in the ATS candidate profile — in structured fields, not just a note?
- Disposition sync: Do rejection reasons and archive status sync back for reporting and compliance?
Also confirm: who owns the connector (vendor, middleware, or you), what the SLA is when it breaks, and what happens during ATS updates or API changes.
The real test: Ask any vendor to show you a completed candidate record in your ATS after an interview. If they can't demo the synced fields in 10 minutes, expect manual work.
If you're on Greenhouse, Lever, or Workable: Ask specifically about invite-on-stage-change, where artifacts (transcripts, scores, video links) live in the candidate profile, and whether reviewers can stay in the ATS or need to switch to the vendor's platform.
How to choose: Decision framework by team type
Instead of evaluating every platform against every criterion, start from your situation.
"We're a TA team or staffing agency drowning in applications."
Go with: Truffle or Spark Hire.
Your bottleneck is phone screen volume. You need async screening that gives you transcripts, summaries, and scoring so you can review candidates in minutes instead of scheduling 30-minute calls. Truffle if you want the deepest AI review support (match scores with reasoning, Candidate Shorts, transcript summaries) at a flat rate. Spark Hire if you also need live interviewing in the same tool.
"We're an enterprise TA team running global hiring programs."
Go with: HireVue or VidCruiter.
You need governance, compliance infrastructure, multi-region support, and integration with enterprise ATS/HCM systems. HireVue if you need the broadest global footprint and integrated assessments. VidCruiter if you need configurable multi-stage workflows with granular control.
"We're a small HR team hiring across many roles and just need something simple."
Learn more about how HireVue and VidCruiter compare.
Go with: Willo, myInterview, or Hireflix.
You don't need enterprise features or deep AI. You need a tool your team will actually use — clean candidate experience, easy review, fast setup. Willo if candidate UX is the priority. myInterview for approachable multi-role screening. Hireflix if you already have rubrics and just need a reliable async collection tool.
"We need async and live in one platform."
Go with: Spark Hire or VidCruiter.
Some teams don't want to juggle vendors. Spark Hire covers both at mid-market complexity. VidCruiter covers both with more enterprise configurability. Tradeoff: platforms that do both may not go as deep on either as specialized tools.
How to evaluate video interview software: A step-by-step guide
Here are the six steps to evaluate a one-way video interview software.
Step 1: Match the format to your bottleneck
If phone screens are the bottleneck (high volume, scheduling chaos, inconsistent evaluation), start with async one-way interviews. If final-round coordination is the problem (panels, time zones, stakeholder alignment), prioritize live with strong scheduling. Most teams need async first — that's where the biggest time savings are.
Step 2: Standardize your evaluation
The tool matters less than the process. Build a rubric with 4–6 criteria per role family, each with clear scoring anchors (not just 1–5 with no definitions). Standardized rubrics cut second-guessing and make reviewer calibration fast — often a 30-minute session is enough.
Step 3: Validate ATS integration for your specific workflow
Use the four-handoff checklist above. Run one real requisition through the full loop before you go live with candidates: stage change → invite sent → candidate completes → reviewer sees results → ATS record updates. If it breaks in testing, it'll break at volume.
Step 4: Design questions that surface real signal
Ask for examples, tradeoffs, and constraints — not hypotheticals. "Tell me about a time you had to handle an upset customer with no manager available" beats "How would you handle a difficult customer?" every time. Keep it tight: 4–6 questions, 1–2 minutes per answer, with enough prep time that candidates aren't blindsided.
Step 5: Pilot one role for two weeks
Pick a high-volume, repeatable role. Track completion rate (are candidates finishing?), time to review (how long per candidate?), and whether the shortlist quality holds up when you move candidates to live interviews. If the numbers work, roll the playbook to the next role. If they don't, adjust question length, clarity, or reminders before scaling.
Step 6: Use AI as decision support, not the decision
AI can transcribe, summarize, and surface match signals. Treat it as a thorough note-taker — it helps you review faster, but you're still watching videos and making every advancement decision. Every score should include reasoning you can evaluate yourself.
Frequently asked questions
What is one-way video interview software?
One-way (or asynchronous) video interview software lets candidates record answers to structured questions on their own time. Your team reviews recordings, transcripts, and AI-generated summaries in batches — replacing live phone screens with a faster, more consistent first-round screening process.
Is Truffle better than HireVue for small teams?
Different tools for different situations. Truffle is built for lean TA teams and SMBs that need fast async screening — $99/month, 10-minute setup, unlimited users. HireVue is built for enterprise teams running global hiring programs with compliance infrastructure and integrated assessments. If you're a small team doing high-volume first-round screening, Truffle gets you to signal faster. If you're running multi-region enterprise programs, HireVue has the governance and scale.
Does video interview software replace phone screens?
Async video interviews replace the first-round phone screen for most high-volume roles. Instead of scheduling 30-minute calls, candidates record answers on their own time, and your team reviews transcripts and summaries in minutes. You still have live conversations with aligned candidates — you just have them with fewer people and better information.
Can candidates use their phone for video interviews?
Most modern platforms support mobile, browser-based recording — no app download required. This matters for candidate completion rates. Check that your chosen platform supports mobile without friction, especially for hourly and frontline roles where candidates may not have desktop access.
How does AI work in video interview software?
The best implementations use AI to transcribe responses, generate summaries, and surface match scores — with reasoning behind every score so you can evaluate the AI's work. AI helps you review faster; you make all hiring decisions. Avoid platforms where AI scoring is a black box without explanation.
Look for transcript-based analysis specifically. Platforms that analyze what candidates say (rather than how they look or sound) avoid the bias concerns that come with facial analysis, tone scoring, or body language evaluation.
Does Truffle integrate with Greenhouse?
Yes. Truffle has native Greenhouse integration with auto-invites on stage change and writeback of transcripts, scores, and interview links to the candidate profile. Truffle also integrates via Zapier and API for other ATS platforms.
What's a good completion rate for one-way video interviews?
Completion rates typically range from 70–90% depending on how candidates are invited. The key factors: clear instructions, reasonable time limits (1–2 minutes per question), mobile support, and framing the interview as a "quick 10-minute video interview you can do from your phone, anytime this week." Longer interviews with vague instructions see lower completion.
How much does video interview software cost?
Self-serve SMB tools range from ~$99–$400/month. Enterprise suites run $10K–$100K+/year depending on volume, modules, and compliance requirements. The key cost differences are feature gating (what's included vs. extra), implementation fees (self-serve has none; enterprise can be significant), and pricing model (per-user, per-interview, flat-rate, or per-job). See the pricing comparison section above for details.
What's the difference between video interview software and Zoom?
Video interview software adds structure (same questions for every candidate), scoring (built-in rubrics for consistent evaluation), and workflow (automated invites, reminders, ATS handoffs, and audit trails). Zoom is a meeting tool. Video interview software is a screening workflow — it helps you evaluate and compare, not just meet.
This guide is published by Truffle. We've included our product alongside competitors with honest tradeoffs for each — including where Truffle falls short. Evaluations are based on publicly available product information and vendor-documented features as of Q1 2026. Verify pricing and capabilities directly with vendors before purchasing.
The TL;DR
You don't need another "modern" tool while you're drowning in resumes and juggling calendars. You need video interview software that takes a noisy applicant pool and helps you figure out who's worth a real conversation fast.
This guide covers async vs. live interviews, how ATS integrations actually work, a 2026 vendor comparison with honest tradeoffs, and a decision framework you can use this week.
What to look for in video interview software
Before you compare platforms, know what actually matters for how your team hires. Most feature lists are long on buzzwords and short on workflow impact.
These are the capabilities that separate tools you'll use from tools you'll abandon in a month.
- Structured evaluation. Built-in rubrics, scorecards, and anchored rating scales so every reviewer applies the same standards. Without this, you're just collecting videos in a folder. The best video interview software makes comparison easy, not just collection.
- AI that supports your review — not replaces it. Transcription, summaries, and match scoring that help you review faster. Look for reasoning behind every score so you can evaluate the AI's work, not just trust it. Avoid platforms where AI is a black box.
- ATS integration that actually syncs. "Integrates with Greenhouse" can mean real-time bi-directional sync or a pasted link. You need invite triggers, completion status updates, results write-back, and disposition sync. If the vendor can't demo the full loop for your ATS, expect manual work.
- Candidate experience. Mobile-first, browser-based (no app downloads), clear instructions, reasonable time limits, and prep time before recording. A clunky candidate experience tanks your completion rate — and your employer brand.
- Setup speed. How long from sign-up to a live job with real candidates? Self-serve tools can get you there in minutes. Enterprise platforms may take weeks. Know which lane you're in.
- Pricing transparency. Can you find the price without a sales call? Do you know what's included at your tier and what costs extra? Surprises at contract time are a red flag.
Two formats, one decision
- One-way (asynchronous): Candidates record answers to structured questions on their own schedule. Your team reviews in batches — transcripts, summaries, and scores instead of live calls. Best for high-volume screening where phone screens are the bottleneck.
- Live: Real-time video with back-and-forth conversation, built-in notes, and structured scoring. Best for final rounds, technical deep-dives, stakeholder alignment, and closing.
Most teams need both. Use asynchronous interviews to narrow the field, then live to go deep with the candidates who earned a real conversation.
Why it's not just Zoom or Teams
Video interview software adds structure (same questions for every candidate), scoring (built-in rubrics for consistent comparison), and workflow (invites, reminders, audit trails, and ATS handoffs). Zoom helps you meet. This helps you screen and decide.
When to use each format
One-way (async) interviews work best when candidates get a link, record answers to 3–6 questions with time limits, and submit. Your team reviews on your schedule — not theirs. This is where teams reclaim the most time. Instead of scheduling and sitting through calls to find out someone can't work weekends, you review a transcript in a couple of minutes and move on.
Best for: hourly roles, customer support, sales development, healthcare staffing, franchise hiring, seasonal spikes — anywhere phone screens have become calendar Tetris.
Live interviews work best for synchronous conversation, typically 30–60 minutes. Use live when you need real interaction: final rounds, technical deep-dives, role plays, stakeholder conversations, and closing. It captures nuance you can't get asynchronously — collaboration style, reasoning under pressure, how someone handles follow-up questions.
The hybrid approach that works
Async to shortlist, live to decide.
Screen with 4–5 structured questions mapped to your rubric. Review transcripts, summaries, and scores to identify who's aligned. Then run live interviews only with candidates who've already demonstrated they're worth your time.
Go heavier on async when you have high volume, lean recruiting capacity, or multiple locations. Go heavier on live for high-ambiguity roles, on-the-fly problem solving, or leadership hires.
2026 video interview software comparison
We reviewed platforms across SMB and enterprise use cases, testing end-to-end flows (invite → candidate experience → review → collaboration → ATS handoff) and common edge cases (mobile completion, slow connections, multiple reviewers, high-volume batches).
Each tool was evaluated on ATS integration quality, AI capabilities, candidate UX, pricing transparency, setup time, and team fit. Pricing changes often — verify with the vendor before you commit.
Methodology note: Evaluations are based on publicly available product information, vendor demos, and documented feature sets as of Q1 2026. We focused on the workflows that matter most to lean TA teams and staffing agencies doing high-volume screening. Truffle is our product — we've flagged that clearly and included honest limitations.
| Platform | Best for | Async | Live | AI review support | ATS integration depth | Pricing model | Setup time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Truffle | Growing companies hiring across multiple departments that need to screen every applicant without phone-screening all of them | Full (core product) | No native live | AI-assisted candidate summaries and match scores, transcripts/search, Candidate Shorts highlight reels, structured evaluation, AI-resistant assessments (IPIP Big Five Personality, Situational Judgment, Environment Fit) | Native integrations + Zapier/API. Auto-invites on stage change, writeback of transcripts and scores | $149/month ($99/month paid annually). Unlimited users. Free 7-day trial | 10–15 minutes |
| Spark Hire | SMB/mid-market teams wanting async + live in one tool | Yes | Yes | Varies by plan — confirm AI depth for your tier | Often via partner connectors — verify true sync vs. link-only for your ATS | Subscription tiers, varies by seats/usage | 1–3 days |
| HireVue | Enterprise TA running global, high-volume programs with compliance requirements | Yes | Yes | Integrated assessments and workflow automation | Major enterprise ATS/HCM via native or partner connectors | Quote-based enterprise packages. Factor in professional services and compliance workstreams | 4–12 weeks |
| VidCruiter | Mid-market to enterprise teams needing configurable multi-stage workflows | Yes | Yes | Standardized evaluation tools | Often sold with integration support — verify sync depth | Quote-based, depends on modules and volume | 2–6 weeks |
| Willo | Teams prioritizing polished candidate UX for async with lightweight collaboration | Yes | No | Lightweight | Often via Zapier or webhooks | Tiered by jobs/seats/volume | 30–90 minutes |
| myInterview | Small HR teams hiring across many roles who want approachable video screening | Yes | No | Lightweight | Commonly link-based or automation-driven | Transparent tiers — confirm caps | 15–60 minutes |
| interviewstream | Teams needing structured, repeatable interview processes at scale | Yes | Yes | Standardized documentation tools | Varies by ATS and package | Quote-based | 2–8 weeks |
| Jobma | Volume teams wanting async + supporting features without enterprise complexity | Yes | Limited | Basic collaboration tools | Often positioned with ATS connectivity — confirm your specific system | Subscription-based — confirm per-seat vs per-interview | 1–5 days |
| Hireflix | Teams with existing rubrics who want a clean, focused async tool | Yes | No | Minimal | Often via links and automations | Straightforward subscriptions | Same day |
Where each platform wins
Truffle wins on speed-to-signal for growing companies hiring across multiple departments. It helps you screen every applicant without phone-screening all of them by combining async video (Candidate Shorts) with AI-assisted summaries, transcripts, and match scores that explain why someone looks like a fit. Then the AI-resistant assessments add the missing layer: personality tendencies (IPIP Big Five), situational judgment, and environment fit, so you’re not just measuring what a candidate can say on camera, but how they’re likely to operate day to day. The result is a ranked, evidence-backed shortlist in minutes, with structured evaluation your team can align on before you invest time in live calls.
Where Truffle falls short: No native live interviewing. If you need async and live in one platform, you'll pair Truffle with another tool for final rounds.
Spark Hire wins on format flexibility. Async and live in one tool with team collaboration. If your team wants a single platform covering both screening and final-round conversations, Spark Hire handles both without juggling vendors. Good option for mid-market teams that don't want enterprise complexity but need more than pure async.
HireVue wins on global enterprise infrastructure. If you're running hiring programs across multiple regions, business units, and compliance regimes, HireVue has the governance and scale. Integrated assessments, workflow controls, and administration tools built for large-program management. The implementation investment matches — plan for weeks, not days.
VidCruiter wins on workflow configurability. Multi-stage interview processes with standardized evaluation across departments. Strong for organizations that need auditable, repeatable processes and want control over exactly how interviews flow. More configuration than lightweight tools, which is a feature if you need it and overhead if you don't.
Willo wins on candidate experience. Clean, polished async interface that candidates actually enjoy using. Fast to adopt and easy for reviewers. If candidate UX is your top priority and you need lightweight async without deep AI, Willo delivers.
myInterview wins on simplicity. If you're a small HR team hiring across many roles and want video screening without a learning curve, myInterview gets you there fast. Easy sharing and lightweight review. Less depth in structured scoring, but the tradeoff is speed of adoption.
Hireflix wins on focused simplicity. Clean async tool that does one thing well. If you already have rubrics and evaluation processes and just need a reliable way to collect structured video responses, Hireflix stays out of your way.
Pricing models and what to watch for
Here are the four video interview pricing models.
Per-user pricing is predictable for stable teams but can penalize collaboration if adding reviewers costs extra. Ask whether hiring managers count as seats.
Per-interview or per-candidate pricing works for seasonal spikes and variable volume. Risky if a busy month blows your budget. Confirm how "interview" is defined (started vs. completed) and whether retakes count.
Unlimited / flat-rate pricing is best for consistent high volume. Check for fair-use caps, storage limits, and whether "unlimited" applies to jobs, candidates, users, or all three.
Per-job pricing means you pay for each active job posting with interviews enabled. Good if you hire for a few roles at a time; expensive if you run many concurrent requisitions.
What to ask before you buy
- Feature gating: Which capabilities are included at your tier and which cost extra? Common upsells: ATS write-back, AI-generated summaries and scores, branded experiences, SSO, analytics, and premium support.
- Implementation fees: Self-serve tools usually have none. Enterprise platforms may charge for onboarding, configuration, integration build, and training. Get a number, not "we'll scope it."
- Overage pricing: What happens when you exceed your plan's volume — per-interview charges, automatic tier upgrades, or throttling?
- Contract terms: Monthly vs. annual commitment, cancellation terms, and what happens to your data (recordings, transcripts, scores) if you leave.
- Total cost of ownership: Beyond the license, factor in integration maintenance, internal admin time, compliance workstreams (if AI evaluation triggers regulatory requirements in your jurisdiction), and the cost of scaling to additional roles and locations.
The cheapest tool isn't always the best deal. A platform that costs more but gets you from applicant to shortlist in a day — with clean ATS data and structured evaluation — often pays for itself in recruiter hours within the first month.
ATS integrations: What to verify before you sign
This is where buying decisions go wrong. "We integrate with your ATS" can mean real-time bi-directional sync or a pasted link. Confirm the actual workflow for your ATS before you commit.
Four handoffs to validate
- Invite trigger: Does an ATS stage change automatically send the interview invite — or does a recruiter do it manually?
- Completion sync: Does the candidate's completion status update in the ATS in real-time?
- Results write-back: Do transcripts, scores, summaries, and interview links land in the ATS candidate profile — in structured fields, not just a note?
- Disposition sync: Do rejection reasons and archive status sync back for reporting and compliance?
Also confirm: who owns the connector (vendor, middleware, or you), what the SLA is when it breaks, and what happens during ATS updates or API changes.
The real test: Ask any vendor to show you a completed candidate record in your ATS after an interview. If they can't demo the synced fields in 10 minutes, expect manual work.
If you're on Greenhouse, Lever, or Workable: Ask specifically about invite-on-stage-change, where artifacts (transcripts, scores, video links) live in the candidate profile, and whether reviewers can stay in the ATS or need to switch to the vendor's platform.
How to choose: Decision framework by team type
Instead of evaluating every platform against every criterion, start from your situation.
"We're a TA team or staffing agency drowning in applications."
Go with: Truffle or Spark Hire.
Your bottleneck is phone screen volume. You need async screening that gives you transcripts, summaries, and scoring so you can review candidates in minutes instead of scheduling 30-minute calls. Truffle if you want the deepest AI review support (match scores with reasoning, Candidate Shorts, transcript summaries) at a flat rate. Spark Hire if you also need live interviewing in the same tool.
"We're an enterprise TA team running global hiring programs."
Go with: HireVue or VidCruiter.
You need governance, compliance infrastructure, multi-region support, and integration with enterprise ATS/HCM systems. HireVue if you need the broadest global footprint and integrated assessments. VidCruiter if you need configurable multi-stage workflows with granular control.
"We're a small HR team hiring across many roles and just need something simple."
Learn more about how HireVue and VidCruiter compare.
Go with: Willo, myInterview, or Hireflix.
You don't need enterprise features or deep AI. You need a tool your team will actually use — clean candidate experience, easy review, fast setup. Willo if candidate UX is the priority. myInterview for approachable multi-role screening. Hireflix if you already have rubrics and just need a reliable async collection tool.
"We need async and live in one platform."
Go with: Spark Hire or VidCruiter.
Some teams don't want to juggle vendors. Spark Hire covers both at mid-market complexity. VidCruiter covers both with more enterprise configurability. Tradeoff: platforms that do both may not go as deep on either as specialized tools.
How to evaluate video interview software: A step-by-step guide
Here are the six steps to evaluate a one-way video interview software.
Step 1: Match the format to your bottleneck
If phone screens are the bottleneck (high volume, scheduling chaos, inconsistent evaluation), start with async one-way interviews. If final-round coordination is the problem (panels, time zones, stakeholder alignment), prioritize live with strong scheduling. Most teams need async first — that's where the biggest time savings are.
Step 2: Standardize your evaluation
The tool matters less than the process. Build a rubric with 4–6 criteria per role family, each with clear scoring anchors (not just 1–5 with no definitions). Standardized rubrics cut second-guessing and make reviewer calibration fast — often a 30-minute session is enough.
Step 3: Validate ATS integration for your specific workflow
Use the four-handoff checklist above. Run one real requisition through the full loop before you go live with candidates: stage change → invite sent → candidate completes → reviewer sees results → ATS record updates. If it breaks in testing, it'll break at volume.
Step 4: Design questions that surface real signal
Ask for examples, tradeoffs, and constraints — not hypotheticals. "Tell me about a time you had to handle an upset customer with no manager available" beats "How would you handle a difficult customer?" every time. Keep it tight: 4–6 questions, 1–2 minutes per answer, with enough prep time that candidates aren't blindsided.
Step 5: Pilot one role for two weeks
Pick a high-volume, repeatable role. Track completion rate (are candidates finishing?), time to review (how long per candidate?), and whether the shortlist quality holds up when you move candidates to live interviews. If the numbers work, roll the playbook to the next role. If they don't, adjust question length, clarity, or reminders before scaling.
Step 6: Use AI as decision support, not the decision
AI can transcribe, summarize, and surface match signals. Treat it as a thorough note-taker — it helps you review faster, but you're still watching videos and making every advancement decision. Every score should include reasoning you can evaluate yourself.
Frequently asked questions
What is one-way video interview software?
One-way (or asynchronous) video interview software lets candidates record answers to structured questions on their own time. Your team reviews recordings, transcripts, and AI-generated summaries in batches — replacing live phone screens with a faster, more consistent first-round screening process.
Is Truffle better than HireVue for small teams?
Different tools for different situations. Truffle is built for lean TA teams and SMBs that need fast async screening — $99/month, 10-minute setup, unlimited users. HireVue is built for enterprise teams running global hiring programs with compliance infrastructure and integrated assessments. If you're a small team doing high-volume first-round screening, Truffle gets you to signal faster. If you're running multi-region enterprise programs, HireVue has the governance and scale.
Does video interview software replace phone screens?
Async video interviews replace the first-round phone screen for most high-volume roles. Instead of scheduling 30-minute calls, candidates record answers on their own time, and your team reviews transcripts and summaries in minutes. You still have live conversations with aligned candidates — you just have them with fewer people and better information.
Can candidates use their phone for video interviews?
Most modern platforms support mobile, browser-based recording — no app download required. This matters for candidate completion rates. Check that your chosen platform supports mobile without friction, especially for hourly and frontline roles where candidates may not have desktop access.
How does AI work in video interview software?
The best implementations use AI to transcribe responses, generate summaries, and surface match scores — with reasoning behind every score so you can evaluate the AI's work. AI helps you review faster; you make all hiring decisions. Avoid platforms where AI scoring is a black box without explanation.
Look for transcript-based analysis specifically. Platforms that analyze what candidates say (rather than how they look or sound) avoid the bias concerns that come with facial analysis, tone scoring, or body language evaluation.
Does Truffle integrate with Greenhouse?
Yes. Truffle has native Greenhouse integration with auto-invites on stage change and writeback of transcripts, scores, and interview links to the candidate profile. Truffle also integrates via Zapier and API for other ATS platforms.
What's a good completion rate for one-way video interviews?
Completion rates typically range from 70–90% depending on how candidates are invited. The key factors: clear instructions, reasonable time limits (1–2 minutes per question), mobile support, and framing the interview as a "quick 10-minute video interview you can do from your phone, anytime this week." Longer interviews with vague instructions see lower completion.
How much does video interview software cost?
Self-serve SMB tools range from ~$99–$400/month. Enterprise suites run $10K–$100K+/year depending on volume, modules, and compliance requirements. The key cost differences are feature gating (what's included vs. extra), implementation fees (self-serve has none; enterprise can be significant), and pricing model (per-user, per-interview, flat-rate, or per-job). See the pricing comparison section above for details.
What's the difference between video interview software and Zoom?
Video interview software adds structure (same questions for every candidate), scoring (built-in rubrics for consistent evaluation), and workflow (automated invites, reminders, ATS handoffs, and audit trails). Zoom is a meeting tool. Video interview software is a screening workflow — it helps you evaluate and compare, not just meet.
This guide is published by Truffle. We've included our product alongside competitors with honest tradeoffs for each — including where Truffle falls short. Evaluations are based on publicly available product information and vendor-documented features as of Q1 2026. Verify pricing and capabilities directly with vendors before purchasing.
Try Truffle instead.
