Criba vs a traditional ATS
An applicant tracking system stores and moves candidates through stages. Criba does the screening itself. Here is how they differ — and why most teams need both.
Different jobs, not direct rivals
A traditional ATS is a system of record: it tracks applicants, stores resumes, and manages pipeline stages. It does not decide who is worth interviewing. Criba is a screening engine: it runs the first round and ranks candidates with evidence. Many teams keep their ATS and add Criba for the part it was never built to do.
Side-by-side comparison
| Capability | Criba | Traditional ATS |
|---|---|---|
| First-round screening | Runs it automatically over text, voice, or video | Not included — you screen manually |
| Candidate scoring | Ranked against your rubric with evidence | Manual notes and tags |
| Time to shortlist | Minutes to hours, in parallel | Days of sequential phone screens |
| Evidence for decisions | Scores linked to candidate quotes | Recruiter memory and free-text notes |
| Pipeline & stage tracking | Focused on screening, integrates upstream | Core strength |
| Getting started cost | Free text screenings to start | Typically per-seat annual contracts |
Frequently asked questions
Does Criba replace my ATS?
Usually not. An ATS is a system of record for tracking applicants; Criba is a screening engine that decides who is worth interviewing. Most teams run both and use Criba for the first round.
What does a traditional ATS not do?
A traditional ATS stores and moves candidates through stages but does not actually screen them. The first-round evaluation is still manual work, which is exactly what Criba automates.
Can I use Criba alongside my existing tools?
Yes. Criba focuses on automated screening and scoring and is designed to complement the applicant tracking and pipeline tools you already use.