Resume ATS Match Checker
Paste the job description and your resume. Get a match score ring, your matched keywords, and — most useful — every missing keyword explained one by one.
How it works
- Paste the JD and your resume into the two boxes. Both are processed locally — nothing leaves your browser.
- The checker builds a keyword list from the JD (a built-in list of 80+ workplace terms plus recurring words in the posting), then compares it to your resume.
- Read your score ring, the matched keywords, and the missing-keyword explanations. Each missing term tells you why ATS/HR cares and how to phrase it on your resume — if you genuinely have the experience.
We compare the keywords and recurring terms in the job description against the words on your resume. The score = found keywords divided by total required keywords, shown as a percentage. It is an estimate, not a guarantee — real ATS systems weight keywords differently per employer.
No. The JD and your resume are processed 100% locally in your browser. Nothing is sent to a server, and the text disappears when you close the tab. This matters: pasting your real resume into random online tools can leak personal data.
It does not — it only explains why each missing keyword matters and how to write it if you genuinely have the experience. Never claim a skill you don't have; instead, rephrase your real experience so it mirrors the JD's wording.
Above 70% usually means a reasonable shot at passing a first filter. 50-70% means you need one or two rewrites. Below 50% usually means the role needs a genuinely different background — adjusting wording won't fix that.
Most online checkers upload your resume to their servers and charge after one use. This one runs entirely on your device, is free, and shows you the reasoning for every missing keyword instead of just a number.
Who this tool is for
Use this checker when you already have a finished draft and one specific posting, and you want to know why the same resume keeps going quiet. It suits people applying for office and operations roles where the first screen is automated: HR generalists, marketing associates, operations coordinators, customer support specialists and finance assistants.
It is not a resume writer and not a hiring forecast. The percentage tells you how much of the vocabulary in that one posting appears in your text. If you have not written the resume yet, start with the keyword optimiser instead; this page assumes there is something to compare.
How to read your result
The ring shows one ratio: keywords found in the posting that also appear on your resume, divided by all the keywords detected in the posting. Under the ring you see the fraction, for example 11 / 18. The denominator is not an official employer list; it is the tool's reading of the posting. Treat the ring as a directional signal and the fraction as the honest part.
The matched list is capped at 25 chips. It is mostly reassurance: those strings are present, so stop editing them. The missing section is where the work is. Up to eight missing terms appear, each with two lines. The first explains why a recruiter or filter might look for the phrase. The second suggests how to phrase it on a resume if the experience is real. Read both lines before touching your draft; the suggested sentence is usually a shape you fill with your own scope, not a sentence to paste.
Below that you get five quick fixes. They apply to layout as well as wording — single column, clear headings, no table-based structure. If nothing is missing, the panel says full match and redirects you to quantifying your bullets, which is the right next job.
A worked example
Imagine you are applying for an HR generalist role at a 200-person logistics firm. You paste the posting and your current resume. The tool finds terms such as recruiting, onboarding, employee relations, payroll, performance management, Excel and applicant tracking. Your resume contains recruiting and Excel, but your experience section describes “supported new joiners” and “helped with monthly payroll checks”.
The run might return a score in the low sixties with a missing list that includes onboarding and payroll. For onboarding, the hint suggests: “Built an onboarding checklist that cut new-hire ramp-up by 2 days.” You did build a checklist, so you rewrite your bullet to say that, with the real number of days you saved. For payroll, the hint suggests naming the cycle and the headcount: “Ran bi-weekly payroll for 80 employees without errors.” If you only checked totals rather than ran the cycle, write that instead — “reconciled bi-weekly payroll totals for 80 employees” — because the tool is showing you the employer's vocabulary, not granting you the experience.
After those two edits, run it again. If the score moves up by a few points, the change was real. If it does not, the gap is elsewhere, and you can stop polishing that section.
Common mistakes
- Pasting a PDF straight into the box. Copy plain text from your document, otherwise line breaks and column order scramble the comparison.
- Reading the percentage as the employer's own score. Different systems weight terms differently; this is one local estimate built from the text you supplied.
- Chasing 100%. A near-perfect ratio usually means you have stuffed every phrase in, including ones you cannot defend.
- Adding a standalone skills block to close the gap. An unexplained list of nouns scores worse than a bullet that shows the work.
- Ignoring the denominator. A high score on a posting that mentions very little is not evidence of fit.
Finally, keep the honesty rule: the tool describes what the posting asks for and how people usually phrase it. It never checks your claims. If a missing keyword represents experience you do not have, the useful conclusion is that this posting is a stretch, not that your wording failed.