Coming from Workday Recruiting? See the 12-step escape guide → Read it
Affiliate Disclosure: This page contains affiliate links. We earn a commission if you purchase through them — at no extra cost to you. We also recommend tools we do not earn from (marked "Non-affiliate") when they are the honest answer for your situation. Our scoring methodology is independent of commercial relationships.

Workable vs Breezy HR (2026): Which SMB ATS Actually Wins?

Last tested: 2026-04-18

Workable

8.2/10
Read full review →

Breezy HR

7.8/10
Read full review →

Use-case verdicts

First ATS for a 10–50 employee startup
Workable wins

Workable's onboarding speed and LinkedIn native integration edge out Breezy at this critical inflection point. You will be posting to LinkedIn within hours.

Video interviews included in base plan
Breezy HR wins

Breezy HR Business tier includes video interviews at no add-on cost. Workable charges extra for its video interview add-on.

Job board syndication breadth
Workable wins

Workable syndicates to 200+ job boards natively vs Breezy's 50+. For broad posting coverage, Workable wins.

Pipeline UI and drag-and-drop experience
Breezy HR wins

Breezy HR's Kanban pipeline is the cleanest drag-and-drop UI in the SMB ATS space. Workable is functional but not as polished at the stage-level interaction.

Budget under $200/month
Workable wins

Workable Starter at $169/mo gives more breadth than Breezy Startup at $189/mo for a comparable price point.

The one-paragraph verdict

For the “we just outgrew a spreadsheet” startup, Workable is the safer bet: it has broader job board integration, a faster time-to-functional, and a Starter plan that costs $30/month less than Breezy’s equivalent. Breezy wins on UI quality and includes video interviews in its Business tier without an add-on charge. Both tools are affiliate partners. The honest answer depends on which feature axis you weight highest.

Real pricing side-by-side

WorkableBreezy HR
Entry plan$169/mo (50 employees)$189/mo Startup
Realistic active SMB cost$300–$800/mo$329–$479/mo
Video interviewsAdd-on (extra cost)Included on Business
LinkedIn integrationNative two-way syncStandard posting only
Job board count200+50+

Both tools lead with sticker prices that understate real first-year cost once you add integrations, reporting tiers, and per-job extras. Budget for the realistic band above.

Feature scorecard

Axis Workable Breezy HR
LinkedIn integration depth Full two-way sync — InMail logs back Standard posting only
Job board syndication 200+ boards 50+ boards
Pipeline UI quality Good — functional Kanban Excellent — best in SMB class
Video interviews Add-on (extra cost) Included on Business tier
Onboarding speed 2 hours to functional Same-day setup
AI sourcing 400M+ profile database Basic sourcing tool
Reporting (base tier) Basic — source attribution, time-to-fill Basic — similar coverage
Entry price $169/mo Starter $189/mo Startup

Who wins each use case

Startup hiring its first 10 roles on a deadline

Winner: Workable. The LinkedIn two-way sync alone justifies Workable at this stage. If you are posting your first batch of real roles and want candidates to flow in from LinkedIn without manual import, Workable handles this out of the box. Breezy does not.

Team that wants the best UI without enterprise complexity

Winner: Breezy HR. If your hiring managers will refuse to use anything that looks like 2018-era enterprise software, Breezy’s pipeline view is the most aesthetically polished SMB ATS. The hiring team adoption rate on Breezy is higher than Workable in our testing — largely because the drag-and-drop is more intuitive.

Running remote hiring with video interviews built in

Winner: Breezy HR. Breezy Business includes a built-in video interview tool (similar functionality to what you would otherwise pay Whereby or Zoom for separately). Workable’s video interview integration requires a third-party add-on at additional monthly cost. If your process is remote-first and you are running 10+ video interviews per month, Breezy wins on TCO at Business tier.

Growing past 50 employees with 2+ recruiters

Winner: Workable. Workable scales more smoothly to a multi-recruiter setup. The AI Sourcing feature, broader integration roster, and more mature reporting make Workable the better platform for a growing team. Breezy is best in its SMB sweet spot; Workable holds up better at 100–200 employees.

Gate-20 Insight

Workable vs Breezy HR: both are per-seat tools, which changes as you scale

Three pricing models dominate this market: per-recruiter-seat (Greenhouse, Lever, Workable), per-total-employee (Ashby, Workday), and per-req (SmartRecruiters, iCIMS). The same 11-person hiring team — 2 recruiters, 5 hiring-manager interviewers, 3 part-time sourcers, 1 agency partner — pays $4,800/year on Greenhouse Essential, $14,400/year on Lever with the sourcing module, and $30,000+/year on Ashby at 100 employees. That gap is not a rounding error. It is the pricing model.

Full breakdown: ATS pricing models explained →

The honest verdict for the most common buyer

The team most likely reading this review is: 20–60 employees, just hit the wall on the Google Sheet ATS, one recruiter or founder-doing-recruiting, needs something that works this week.

For that team: start your Workable trial. The LinkedIn integration and 200+ job board syndication are worth the $30/month premium over Breezy. Breezy is worth evaluating if you have specific reasons to care about video-interview cost or UI quality above all else.

Neither tool is the answer if you are at 100+ employees and need structured interview scorecards or sourcing CRM. At that size, evaluate Greenhouse (structured interviews) or Lever (sourcing CRM).

Editorial note: Prices shown are sourced from public vendor pages and third-party procurement databases (Pin, Vendr, Leonstaff — data from 2026). Actual contract prices vary by company size, negotiation, and contract term.

Go Deeper