Understanding Your ATS Score

Your ATS score estimates how well your resume aligns with a specific job description and how reliably an Applicant Tracking System can parse it. It’s a directional signal to help you prioritize edits—not a pass/fail grade.

Score components

• Keyword coverage: Presence and context of must‑have terms, skills, tools, and certifications.
• Experience match: Alignment of seniority, responsibilities, and domain with the role.
• Formatting & parseability: Use of ATS‑safe structures, headings, and text (no images for critical info).
• Readability: Clarity, density, and scannability for both ATS and humans.

How we calculate it

We analyze your resume against the job description using pattern matching, semantic similarity, and formatting checks. Scores are normalized to a 0–100 scale.

• Weights vary slightly by role family (e.g., engineering vs. marketing) to reflect real screening emphasis.
• Exact phrase matches and semantic equivalents both count, with higher weight for exact requirements.
• Formatting deductions apply for elements that break parsing (tables for core content, images of text, missing headings).

Note: No scoring system is universal across all ATS platforms. We focus on best practices that generalize well.

Benchmarks

• 70+: Competitive for many roles; proceed to apply.
• 55–69: Good foundation; tailor keywords and achievements for a quick lift.
• Below 55: Focus on missing requirements and clarity of impact.

Benchmarks are guidance, not rules. Strong referrals or portfolios can offset lower scores.

How to improve

• Map requirements to bullets: For each job requirement, ensure you have a corresponding, quantified bullet.
• Prioritize exact terms: Use the job’s wording where accurate—e.g., “Python” vs. “scripting.”
• Surface impact early: Top‑load role‑relevant accomplishments in each section.
• Use ATS‑safe headings: Experience, Education, Skills, Projects, Certifications.
• Remove parse blockers: Avoid text in images; minimize tables/columns for core info.

Run another analysis after edits. Many users see a 10–25 point increase within one iteration.

Common misconceptions

• “Higher is always better.” Past ~80, returns diminish; focus on substance and fit.
• “Stuff all keywords.” Keyword stuffing is penalized by modern ATS and hurts readability.
• “One resume fits all.” Light tailoring for each role wins more interviews.

If the score seems off

• Job description quality: Vague or generic JDs reduce signal; try a different posting for the same role.
• Parsing issues: If sections look misread, see Troubleshooting Upload Issues.
• Specialized roles: Niche terminology may require manual emphasis or clarifying bullets.

Include the JD link and your resume when contacting support.

Next steps

• Apply the improvements above to reach your target band.
• Generate a tailored cover letter: Creating AI‑Powered Cover Letters
• Consider a cleaner layout: Choosing the Right Resume Template