"Which app is best for recruiting new talent" has no single answer, because recruiting is four different jobs and no app is best at all of them. The useful version of the question is which app is best for the job you are stuck on.
This page is organised that way: by the problem, not the vendor. We build one of the tools mentioned, and we have tried to be specific about where it does not fit.
First, work out which job you are stuck on
Finding people. You need candidates who do not know your company exists. Sourcing tools.
Reaching them. You have a list and need replies. Outreach and sequencing tools.
Managing them. People are in your pipeline and things are falling through. An applicant tracking system.
Converting them. People enter the pipeline and drop out. CRM and analytics.
Buying an app for the wrong job is the most common way recruiting software disappoints. An ATS will not find you candidates. A sourcing tool will not stop your process leaking. Diagnose first.
For finding engineers specifically
RealGreatDevs
Ours, so weigh accordingly. It indexes 2.5 million software engineers from public GitHub activity and lets you filter on what they have actually built — languages, repository count, contribution recency, country — rather than on a self-reported skill list.
The reason it exists: engineers are the hardest group to evaluate from a profile, because profiles describe work rather than showing it. Public code shows it.
Pricing: self-serve with a free account to start, no annual commitment or placement fees. Aggregate data by skill and country is free to browse.
Not for you if you hire outside engineering. It covers nothing else.
AmazingHiring
A specialist technical sourcing tool aggregating engineer profiles from 50-plus sources including GitHub and Stack Overflow, with strong coverage in Eastern European and CIS markets. Merges multiple online identities into a single profile, which saves real time.
Pricing: not published; annual per-seat contract, so evaluating it means a sales conversation.
For finding candidates across every function
LinkedIn Recruiter
Still the broadest coverage available. Effectively every professional has a profile, and InMail reaches people where they already are.
For engineering specifically, the weakness is that profiles are self-reported and engineers are among the least active groups on the network. For every other function, it is hard to beat.
Pricing: not published. Reported figures put Recruiter Lite in the low thousands per seat per year, with Recruiter Corporate negotiated per contract.
SeekOut
Talent intelligence with the deepest compliance and diversity reporting in the category, plus ATS rediscovery that surfaces candidates you already paid to source.
Pricing: Recruit Lite at $149 per month billed annually. Team plans are custom; independent procurement data puts real contracts at $10,000–$30,000 per seat per year. (Vendr, checked August 2026.)
Not for you if you are a small team. This is priced for a dedicated talent function.
hireEZ
Search plus outbound automation in one product, aggregating from 45-plus sources. The usual choice for teams wanting SeekOut-style capability at a lower entry point.
Pricing: entry tier reported around $169 per seat per month, median contract near $13,000 a year. (Glozo, checked August 2026.)
For reaching and converting candidates
Gem
A recruiting CRM with the strongest pipeline analytics in the category — conversion by source, stage-by-stage drop-off, the numbers that tell you where your process actually leaks. Sequencing and nurture are more mature than in most sourcing tools.
Pricing: custom by company size. Under 30 employees gets All-in-One free for six months plus a discounted first paid year; self-serve startup pricing reported from around $130 per seat per month billed annually. (Glozo, checked August 2026.)
Not for you if your problem is finding candidates. Gem manages relationships with people you have already found.
Fetcher
A managed sourcing service rather than an app you operate. A human team curates candidate batches and delivers them. The right call if you have no sourcing capacity and would rather buy the outcome.
Pricing: quote-based subscription priced per batch.
For candidates who are already looking
Wellfound
Formerly AngelList Talent. Candidates opt in, state salary expectations up front, and are actively open to work, so response rates far exceed cold outbound.
The pool is limited to active candidates and skews strongly toward startups — but it is free to start, which makes it an easy addition rather than a replacement.
What recruiters on Reddit actually recommend
The recurring themes in r/recruiting and r/recruitinghell discussions, which are worth more than most vendor comparisons:
Free sourcing works better than people expect. GitHub search, Google X-ray syntax and community Slack groups cost nothing and are frequently the highest-response channels. Our free sourcing guide covers the syntax.
The message matters more than the tool. The most consistent complaint from engineers is generic outreach. A specific, short, evidently researched message outperforms volume regardless of which app sent it.
Annual contracts are the main regret. The most common frustration is being locked into a seat count that no longer matches the team. Prefer monthly or self-serve until you know the volume is durable.
Two tools usually beat one. Different indexes surface different people. Teams reporting the best results generally run one broad tool and one specialist rather than expecting either to cover everything.
The honest recommendation
Hiring only engineers, small team: start with free GitHub sourcing to learn what your market looks like, then add a specialist tool once volume justifies it.
Hiring across functions: LinkedIn Recruiter as the base, plus a specialist for whichever function is hardest.
Enterprise with a compliance mandate: SeekOut, and negotiate — 15–25% below list is normal for annual prepayment.
No sourcing capacity at all: a managed service like Fetcher will beat software nobody has time to operate.
Detailed head-to-head breakdowns are in our comparisons, and alternatives covers the switching case for each tool.