Screening · Lever pricing
Lever pricing: what Lever ATS costs, what the quote covers, and which AI screening you actually get
Lever does not publish a price. Its own pricing page says the rate is "available upon request" and every button on it is a quote request, so there is no list rate to look up and no self-serve plan to buy. Checked against lever.co on August 31, 2026.
Parse · score · rank · recruiter reviews
Held for recruiter review · never auto-rejected
Screen the pile to watch Prescreener parse every resume, apply your criteria and knockouts, and rank the inbound applicants with a transparent reason on each.
Live, interactive · AI assists, you decide · no signup needed
AI assists · you decide · bias-audited (EEOC / NYC Local Law 144)
Human-in-the-loop you decide
EEOC and LL144 bias-audited
What can be pinned down is what buyers pay. Vendr, which brokers software contracts and publishes anonymized figures, puts the median Lever buyer at $15,400 a year across 318 purchases, with a low of $6,714 and a high of $51,864, and reports an average saving of 16 percent against the first quote. That is a real distribution from real contracts rather than an estimate, and the spread is the point: the same product is sold for roughly eight times more at the top of the range than at the bottom.
The second thing worth knowing is structural, and it is the part most write-ups get wrong. Lever has stopped selling named tiers. There is now one Core Platform, and three add-ons sold separately. One of those add-ons is called AI Screening by VONQ, while the Core Platform separately lists something called AI-powered screening as included. Those are two different products with nearly the same name, and only one of them comes with the base contract.
This page lays out what is verifiable, marks clearly what is not, and does not repeat the per-seat figures that circulate for Lever in third-party roundups, because Lever does not publish them and we could not confirm them.
Why it works
What published screening pricing gets your team
A rate you can read
Lever quotes every buyer separately, which is why the same platform sells for $6,714 and $51,864. Prescreener publishes what screening costs, so the evaluation does not start with a sales call.
Screening is not an add-on
Lever sells AI Screening by VONQ separately from the platform. Reading the inbound pile is the entire job Prescreener does, so it is never a line item you discover during procurement.
Nothing has to migrate
Lever is a system of record, so adopting it is a migration. Prescreener runs in front of the applicant tracking system you already have, which makes the decision cheap to reverse.
What it handles
Parsed, scored and ranked on autopilot
Prescreener reads every inbound resume, applies your knockout and eligibility criteria, asks the screening questions you set, scores role-fit against consistent criteria, and ranks the applicant pile so your recruiters review the top matches first.
- Reads 100 percent of inbound applications, not a sampled subset
- Published pricing, so procurement does not begin with a quote request
- No separate screening add-on to license on top of the platform
- Applies your knockout and eligibility rules identically to every applicant
- Returns the pile ranked, with written evidence behind each placement
- Runs alongside Lever, Greenhouse, Workable, Ashby or Manatal
- Never auto-rejects: it ranks and flags, and a recruiter decides
- Bias-audited to support EEOC standards and NYC Local Law 144
Why Prescreener
One step that screens the whole inbound pile
Not a full ATS, not a six-figure assessment suite, and not a staffing agency. Parse, score, rank and hand off in one place, shaped to the criteria you already hire on.
Reads every resume
Prescreener parses every inbound application, applies your knockout and eligibility criteria, and asks the screening questions you set. Applicants consent and are told AI is screening their application, so no qualified person sits in a backlog for days.
Scores role-fit consistently
Every applicant is scored against the same criteria, with a transparent reason on each candidate, so the pile is compared consistently and the scoring stays bias-audited to support EEOC standards and NYC Local Law 144.
Ranks the pile
The strongest matches rise to the top of a ranked pile your recruiters review first. Prescreener never auto-rejects, it ranks and flags candidates for review, and your team makes every decision.
In depth
Lever pricing, from the quote model to what buyers actually pay
How much does Lever cost?
There is no published Lever price. Lever's pricing page carries no figures anywhere on it, and its own FAQ answers the question directly: pricing is "available upon request" and tailored to your organization's size and hiring needs. Every call to action on the page is a quote request or a demo booking. There is no free tier, no advertised free trial, and no way to buy Lever without speaking to sales.
The best available substitute for a list price is contract data. Vendr publishes anonymized figures from software purchases it has brokered, and for Lever it reports a median of $15,400 a year based on 318 purchases, with observed contracts ranging from $6,714 to $51,864 and an average saving of 16 percent against the opening quote. A separate figure on the same page gives an average contract value of $15,399 across 273 deals handled.
Treat that median as a centre of gravity rather than as your price. A range from roughly $6,700 to roughly $51,900 is a factor of nearly eight, and the variables Vendr names are company size, number of active job openings, user seats, contract term length and which add-on modules you take. A twenty-person startup running four requisitions and a thousand-person company running eighty are not shopping for the same contract, and the median sits between them rather than describing either.
One number that is not on this page: the per-seat monthly rates that circulate for Lever in third-party comparison articles. Lever does not publish them, we could not confirm them against any Lever source, and a figure you cannot trace to the vendor is a guess with a dollar sign in front of it. We have been caught by exactly that pattern before with other vendors, so the rule here is simple. If Lever did not publish it and a contract dataset did not observe it, it does not appear.
| Lever pricing question | What is actually known | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Published list rate | None. "Available upon request" | lever.co pricing page and FAQ |
| Median annual contract | $15,400 a year | Vendr, 318 purchases |
| Observed contract range | $6,714 to $51,864 | Vendr |
| Average saving vs first quote | 16 percent | Vendr |
| Average contract value | $15,399 across 273 deals | Vendr |
| Named plan tiers | None. One Core Platform plus add-ons | lever.co pricing page |
| Free trial | Not advertised | lever.co pricing page |
| Billing model | Annual contract | Vendr |
| Implementation time | "Weeks, not months", no rate given | lever.co FAQ |
Swipe to see the full comparison →
Does Lever use AI to screen resumes, and is it included?
Yes, and this is where the Lever quote gets genuinely confusing, because there are two separate things called screening and they are sold differently.
The Core Platform lists AI-powered screening among its included capabilities, described as automatically prioritizing top candidates with AI-powered matching, insights and signals. That sits inside the base contract along with the applicant tracking system, the CRM, reporting, unlimited AI interview transcripts and summaries, and AI-powered fraud prevention signals that flag suspicious applications.
Separately, Lever sells an add-on called AI Screening by VONQ, described as turning high application volume into pre-screened candidates using agent-based screening embedded in your career site. VONQ is a third party. This add-on is quoted separately from the platform, alongside two other add-ons, Candidate Insights and Onboarding.
So the honest answer to "is AI screening included in Lever" is that a prioritization and matching layer is, and the agent-based high-volume screening product is not. Which one a buyer needs depends entirely on volume. If you are running a handful of requisitions and want the pile sorted, the included capability may be enough. If you are drawing several hundred applications per posting and want them qualified before a recruiter opens them, you are looking at the add-on, and neither Lever nor VONQ publishes what that costs.
That distinction matters at quote time because it is the sort of thing that gets clarified after the contract is signed rather than before. Vendr's own guidance for Lever buyers makes the same point in general terms: clarify which features are in the base platform and which require an add-on purchase. Ask specifically which of the two screening products your quote includes, and ask for the volume limits on it in writing.
| Lever component | What it does | Included or add-on? | Rate published? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicant tracking and CRM | One system for sourcing, nurturing and hiring | Included in Core Platform | No |
| AI-powered screening | Prioritizes top candidates, matching and signals | Included in Core Platform | No |
| AI interview transcripts and summaries | Captures every interview, unlimited | Included in Core Platform | No |
| AI fraud prevention signals | Flags suspicious application patterns | Included in Core Platform | No |
| Reporting and dashboards | Pipeline health and hiring performance | Included in Core Platform | No |
| AI Screening by VONQ | Agent-based pre-screening on your career site | Paid add-on | No |
| Candidate Insights | Surfaces skills, fit, assessment and reference data | Paid add-on | No |
| Onboarding | New hire workflows and document collection | Paid add-on | No |
Swipe to see the full comparison →
What actually drives a Lever quote, and what to negotiate
The variables Lever and its resellers price against are company size, active job openings, user seats, contract length and add-on selection. Two of those are worth attention before you sign, because they are where a contract quietly gets more expensive after year one.
The first is seats. If your agreement defines a seat limit and you cross it, you are into overage charges or a mid-term amendment, and a mid-term amendment is a negotiation you enter with no leverage at all. Hiring managers and interviewers accumulate logins faster than anyone forecasts. Agree your seat expansion terms at the start, when the deal is still competitive, rather than in month eight when you simply need the seats.
The second is the renewal escalator. Annual increases written into a renewal are standard in this category and they compound, so a modest-looking uplift materially changes what the contract costs across a three-year relationship. Lever prefers multi-year terms and discounts them, which is a real saving, but a longer term also locks in whatever escalator the paper carries. Read that clause with the same attention you give the headline number.
The third thing to establish is the one covered above: which screening product is in scope. A quote that includes AI-powered screening in the Core Platform and a quote that includes AI Screening by VONQ are different agreements at different prices, and the names are close enough that a buyer can reasonably believe they have bought the second when they have bought the first.
This is the structural reason a screening layer and a system of record price differently. Prescreener charges for reading applications, which is the volume that actually varies with your hiring, rather than for seats or for a module. It reads every inbound application as it arrives, applies your knockout and eligibility criteria identically to all of them, and hands back the pile ranked with the written evidence behind each placement. It sits in front of Lever rather than replacing it, so nothing migrates and there is no seat count to true up.
Lever vs Greenhouse pricing, and where Lever sits in the Employ ladder
Lever and Greenhouse are the two quote-only platforms most often shortlisted against each other, and for once there is comparable data on both. Vendr puts the median Greenhouse buyer at $26,611 a year across 868 purchases, with a range of $10,222 to $75,001. The median Lever buyer pays $15,400, with a range of $6,714 to $51,864. On observed contracts, Lever lands meaningfully below Greenhouse at the median, at the floor and at the ceiling.
That gap is worth reading carefully rather than as a verdict. Neither vendor publishes a rate, both price against company size and hiring volume, and the buyer populations are not identical. What the data supports is that Lever is the cheaper of the two for a comparable company, not that any given quote will follow the pattern.
The other context that helps is ownership. Lever is owned by Employ Inc, which also owns JazzHR and Jobvite, and Employ positions the three as a deliberate ladder. Lever's own site labels them in order: JazzHR for foundational hiring, Lever for scalable hiring, Jobvite for sophisticated hiring. That is useful to know at two moments. If you outgrow JazzHR, Lever is the intended next step and the migration is a supported path rather than a rip and replace. If you outgrow Lever, the upgrade is Jobvite, which is a different product at an unpublished price, so the ceiling of your Lever relationship is another quote-only conversation.
One shared detail that is easy to miss: Lever and Jobvite both build their AI on IBM's watsonx.governance, and Lever is SOC 2 Type II certified. For a US buyer whose legal team is asking about AI hiring compliance, an auditable governance stack behind the vendor's AI is a real answer to a real question, and it is not something every competitor can point to.
Our full applicant tracking system pricing comparison puts the published rates side by side, and the Greenhouse and Ashby pricing pages go deeper on the two vendors whose quote structures are most often misread.
Good questions
Questions about lever pricing
Explore more
More ways hiring teams screen with Prescreener
Greenhouse pricing
Greenhouse publishes three plan names and no rates. What the ATS actually costs, what verified buyer data shows, and why the estimate articles disagree with each other by thousands of dollars.
Learn moreAshby pricing
Ashby publishes more of its price than almost any competitor, and more than most articles about it admit. The full Foundations band table, the AI credit arithmetic, and what sits outside the subscription.
Learn moreManatal pricing
Manatal is one of the few applicant tracking systems that publishes a rate and puts AI candidate scoring on its cheapest paid plan. Here is every figure, in US dollars, with the caps that decide whether the entry tier fits you.
Learn moreATS pricing comparison
Twenty two applicant tracking systems, the rates they actually publish, and the eleven that will not give you a number without a sales call.
Learn moreAI candidate screening software
Twenty tools sold as AI candidate screening software. Six of them never read your inbound pile.
Learn moreCandidate screening software
Screen every candidate on consistent criteria, then review the top matches.
Learn moreStop reading the inbound pile by hand. Put screening on autopilot.
Set your role and criteria and Prescreener parses every inbound resume, scores role-fit, and ranks the pile for your team. Prescreener ranks and flags candidates, your recruiters make every hiring decision.
Consistent criteria · bias-audited to EEOC and LL144 · human-in-the-loop