Jobscan

Jobscan does not write your resume. It reads the one you already have against a specific job posting and returns a match score, a list of missing keywords and a set of formatting findings. The resume builder, the LinkedIn tool and the job tracker sit around that core; the scan is what people pay for and what they argue about.

This page carries what is measurable about the purchase: what customers report and how their reports are distributed, what the plans cost and in what rhythm, and what the vendor's own documents commit each side to. It carries no opinion on whether a match score gets you hired, because nothing independent measures that. The section on the capability row explains why.

Jobscan Reviews: 4.3 Out of 5, and Where That Average Comes From

The Trustpilot profile has been claimed since January 2021 and carried 340 reviews when this desk read it on 30 August 2026, rating 4.3 out of 5. That is the deepest consumer record any tool in this category has produced so far, and it is roughly three times the sample behind the sibling card on Teal.

It is also collected without invitation, and the platform says so rather than leaving us to infer it. The profile carries the line "No recent history of asking for reviews", followed by "This company hasn't invited customers recently, so reviews may not be representative". Every review marker rendered on the default view read "Unprompted review"; none read "Invited". That matters for reading the number: a record people arrived at on their own runs colder than one collected by emailing customers after a good week, so an uninvited 4.3 is not the same object as an invited 4.3 and this site does not pool the two.

Jobscan Reviews Split Two Ways: 82% Five Star, 12% One Star

The average is the least interesting figure on the profile. The breakdown behind it:

Six per cent of 340 reviewers landed anywhere between delighted and furious. The one-star bucket is the second largest thing on the page, four times the size of the four-star bucket.

A 4.3 headline invites you to picture a product most people find pretty good. The distribution describes something else: two groups who barely overlap. Neither group is a rounding error, and an arithmetic mean is a poor way to summarise a shape like that. Where the number appears on the score card, it appears with its sample size beside it for the same reason.

The vendor is present in the record rather than absent from it. Trustpilot reports that Jobscan has "Replied to 61% of negative reviews" and "Typically replies within 2 weeks", and the reply under the longest recent review runs several paragraphs and engages with a specific complaint the reviewer made about the cover letter feature.

What Reddit Adds to the Jobscan Record, and What It Could Not Settle

Searching Reddit for the brand over the past year returns seven threads, which is seven more than the sibling card in this category could find. Two of the most recent are framed around leaving: one asks for alternatives after the free tier stopped being useful, another about paying for a subscription used for one feature.

This desk opened one of the seven and it did not carry usable evidence about this product. The thread nominally weighed Jobscan against a rival; its two top comments praised the rival, and one volunteered having seen a great many of that rival's advertisements. Whatever that is, it is not a customer report about Jobscan, and it is recorded as unusable rather than mined.

The other six were read only as search-result rows: title, subreddit, age, vote count. Nothing on this page rests on what is inside them, and the two themes they suggest are held in the working record marked as unverified. Three of the seven sit in subreddits carrying between one and five votes, which is thin ground before anyone opens anything.

How Jobscan's 64.5 Was Built

Four rows, computed 30 August 2026, and the composite is the geometric mean of them.

The usability row is the highest in this category. The composite is not, and the arithmetic is worth following rather than taking on trust: Teal's consumer record is weaker on both rating and sample, yet its card finishes at 71.0 against this one's 64.5. The gap is the value row. Jobscan asks $49.95 for a month where its sibling asks $29 for thirty days, and no amount of goodwill in a review record moves a price.

Nobody placed either card. The category page sorts on these numbers when the site builds, so a tool that scores higher tomorrow takes the position tomorrow.

Is Jobscan an Accurate ATS Resume Checker? Nothing Independent Measures It

The row labelled capability publishes a delivery envelope reading rather than a measurement of how well the product does its job. That is a substitution and the card says so where the number sits, because a reader who assumes otherwise will be wrong about what they are comparing.

On 30 August 2026 this desk went looking for something independent that grades consumer resume scanners: a blind-vote arena, a benchmark, a published accuracy study. There is none. What turned up instead is worth stating plainly, because it looks like evidence from a distance. Five comparisons of these tools exist with percentages and league tables in them, and all five are published by companies selling a competing scanner, on their own blogs. A vendor grading its rivals is not a source this site cites. The academic work that exists studies applicant tracking systems themselves rather than the consumer tools that score resumes against them.

So the row answers a smaller question that can actually be checked: what does the product let you leave with? The criterion asks four things and this product's documents answer two, which is the fewest it will compute on. The finished resume downloads as a PDF, named three times on the builder page and again in its own FAQ. No programmatic route out exists for an individual buyer. The paid tier's feature list runs to nineteen entries and none of them is an API, and the partner integration that does exist is sold to organisations rather than to the person this card is scored for. The other two positions are silences: a text document has no resolution to publish, and the word "watermark" does not appear on the builder page at all.

Jobscan Pricing: $49.95 a Month, or $89.95 Every Three

Both billing views render side by side on the plan page, so nothing here was reached by flipping a toggle and no basis was chosen on your behalf.

The monthly figure is the one this site scores, because every category here is read on a monthly basis. At $49.95 it sits well above the median entry price across the tools measured on this site, which is what pulls the value row to 42.0.

The quarterly plan is the better per-month figure by a wide margin and the page marks it "Save 40%". It is also the plan that takes ninety dollars before you have used it for a day.

Is Jobscan Free? Five Scans a Month, and a Builder With No Download Charge

The free tier is not a trial that expires. It publishes a hard ceiling, "5 Free Resume Scans monthly" and "5 ATS & Recruiter Findings", and keeps the job tracker, the resume builder, the resume manager and the Chrome extension underneath it.

The builder is the part worth knowing about, because free resume builders often are not. The page for it says: "Other 'free' resume builders charge the moment you try to download. Ours doesn't. Create, edit, and save unlimited ATS-friendly resumes, free from start to finish." The finished document comes out as a PDF on that tier.

Whether the free output carries a mark is a different question and one nobody answers. The word does not appear on the page. A promise about not charging is not a statement about not marking, and this site does not convert one into the other; the position is recorded as unstated.

The Jobscan Trial Only Exists on the Plan That Bills Three Months

The seven-day free trial is attached to the quarterly plan. It is not available on the monthly plan, and the vendor states this in its own FAQ rather than leaving it to be discovered: "There is no trial period if you opted out to gain full access to LinkedIn Optimization or selected a monthly plan."

Read that against the two prices and the shape of the decision changes. Trying the product before paying for it means choosing the plan that takes $89.95 up front, and the FAQ confirms what happens next: "Once your trial ends, you will be billed for the next quarter of your subscription if you selected a quarterly plan." The flexible option is the one with no trial; the option with a trial is the one that commits a quarter.

A second detail sits inside the same sentence. Opting out of the trial is what unlocks full LinkedIn Optimization immediately. The quarterly feature list marks that tool, and two discount lines, "(after trial)".

What Jobscan's Terms Commit You To, and What Happens to Your Data

Three positions in the agreement could be read and scored; the fourth is not answered anywhere this desk read, and it is excluded rather than guessed. A note on sourcing before the findings: the terms could not be extracted by any automated route and were read from the screen, in the Turkish localisation the site serves from this location. Clause positions are unambiguous in that rendering, which is what the scoring needs. The English original was not read, so nothing below is quoted. These are descriptions, not the contract's words.

Indemnification runs from you to the vendor. Section 23 lists six triggers, including your contributions, your use of the service and your breach of the terms. The vendor may take exclusive control of the defence at your expense, and you agree to cooperate at your expense. No obligation runs the other way in that section. This is the ordinary position in this market rather than something unusual to this company: across the vendor agreements read for this site, most read the same way.

You keep ownership of what you put in, and the licence you grant is very wide. Section 9 states that the vendor claims no ownership and that full ownership and associated intellectual property remain with you. The same section takes an automatic, irrevocable, perpetual, transferable, royalty-free, worldwide licence covering commercial and advertising use, resale, sublicensing and derivative works. Both halves are the clause. Owning something and controlling what happens to it are different, and a page that printed only the first half would mislead.

One scope question is open and this desk cannot close it. That licence governs "Contributions", which the agreement defines as material published to the service or exposed by linking a social account. Whether a resume you upload privately falls inside that definition depends on wording in sections this desk did not read. Nothing found says it does; nothing found says it does not.

Liability is capped at what you have paid, and data loss is named among the exclusions. Section 22 sets that cap. Section 24 goes further on the specific point that matters for a product holding your employment history: the vendor stores your data and takes backups, states that you alone are responsible for it, disclaims liability if it is lost or corrupted, and takes a waiver of claims arising from that loss.

Is There a Jobscan Refund? Not on Anything Read Here

No refund window, cooling-off period or money-back language appears on the pricing page, and none appears in the section of the terms governing termination. The FAQ answers the cancellation question directly and the answer is about access rather than money: cancel before the next cycle and you keep paid features until your period ends.

The same answer carries the sentence a buyer should weigh hardest: "When your subscription expires, you will lose access to paid features and all data associated with those features."

Sections of the agreement remain unread, and a refund term inside one of them would change this finding. What can be said is that the two places a buyer would look first, the pricing page and the termination section, do not contain one.

Only One Jobscan Alternative Has Been Scored Here, and It Does a Different Job

Teal is the other scored tool in this category, at 71.0. It is built around writing and tailoring the resume itself rather than scoring one against a posting, so a buyer choosing between them is choosing between two jobs rather than two versions of one. Its billing runs in 7, 30 and 90 day periods instead of monthly, and unlike the tool on this page it publishes a refund window against each of those periods.

Beyond that, this category holds two cards, and anything else a buyer is weighing has not been measured here. Names that recur in the same conversations, among them Resume Worded, Kickresume, Rezi and Enhancv, have no card on this site, no score, and nothing this page will assert about them.

Is Jobscan Worth It? Who the $49.95 Plan Fits

The honest form of that question is narrower than it looks, The thing most people mean by it, whether the match score improves your odds, is exactly what nothing independent measures.

What the evidence supports is a shape. This is a product with the deepest and most enthusiastic consumer record in its category, collected without the vendor asking for it, alongside a one-star population large enough that no summary should hide it. It is priced at the top of the range measured here, its cheaper plan wants a quarter up front, its trial is only available on that plan, and its own documents publish no refund and disclaim responsibility for the data you put in.

That points somewhere specific rather than nowhere. A short, intense search of a few weeks, with applications going out daily and unlimited scans genuinely used, is the case where the quarterly plan's arithmetic works and the up-front commitment matches how long you will need it. Someone applying occasionally over months faces the worst version of every term on this page: the higher monthly price, no trial, no refund, and a data clause that bites precisely when a slow search lapses.

Before either, the free tier answers a question worth answering first. Five scans a month is enough to learn whether the findings tell you something you did not already know about your own resume, and the builder underneath it downloads a finished PDF without asking for a card.