CATS (sometimes styled as CATS One) was once a popular, affordable applicant tracking system favored by small recruiting agencies and lean HR teams. Founded in 2005 in Minneapolis, it earned a loyal following for its straightforward interface, customizable workflows, and low price point. Then Top Echelon acquired it. Since the acquisition, user reports of unresponsive customer support, stagnant feature development, and an inactive vendor presence on major review platforms paint a clear picture: CATS is a product in decline, and prospective buyers should approach with extreme caution.
While the CATS website (catsone.com) remains live and still advertises a free trial, multiple signals suggest the product is effectively in maintenance mode or winding down. The vendor’s profile on major review aggregators has gone inactive, long-time users report being unable to reach support, and no meaningful feature updates have been publicly documented in recent years. We are flagging CATS as discontinued for the purposes of this review. If you are currently using CATS, this review will help you understand where the product stands and what alternatives to consider. If you are evaluating new ATS software, we strongly recommend looking elsewhere.
What Is CATS?
CATS (an acronym that originally stood for “Candidate and Tracking System”) was developed by CATS Software, Inc., founded in 2005 and headquartered at 706 2nd Ave S, Suite 950, Minneapolis, MN 55402. The product first launched as an open-source application before transitioning to a cloud-hosted SaaS model in 2007. At its peak, CATS claimed over 1,800 customers and served industries including engineering, finance, healthcare, education, construction, manufacturing, retail, and professional services. The company employed between 11 and 50 people and generated less than $5 million in annual revenue, according to business data aggregators.
CATS was subsequently acquired by Top Echelon, a recruiting software company based in Canton, Ohio. The Chrome browser extension for CATS is now published by Top Echelon at 4883 Dressler Road NW, Suite 100, Canton, OH 44718. Since the acquisition, user sentiment has shifted dramatically. Multiple reviewers describe declining support responsiveness and a general sense that the new owner does not prioritize the CATS product line. One long-time user summarized it bluntly: “Top Echelon bought Cats and doesn’t care about Cats folks.”
CATS Key Features
Custom Hiring Workflows
CATS offered one of the more configurable workflow systems among budget ATS platforms. Users could define custom stages in their hiring pipeline, create custom fields, set up email triggers, and build screening questionnaires without needing to write code. For small agencies that needed a system to match their existing process rather than forcing adoption of a new one, this was a genuine differentiator. However, the workflow system lacked drag-and-drop functionality, which modern competitors now consider standard.
Resume Parsing and Candidate Search
Automated resume parsing was a core strength. Resumes received via email (through a Resume Inbox feature) were auto-parsed and indexed. The system supported Boolean search with keyword highlighting, allowing recruiters to quickly surface relevant candidates from their database. Document indexing was described by users as near-instant. That said, some users reported inconsistencies with the Boolean search, particularly with more complex queries.
Job Board Distribution
CATS distributed job postings to boards like Indeed and Glassdoor through a “master job feed” rather than direct, native integrations with each job board. This is an important distinction: the master feed approach means CATS submits your listings to aggregators, but there is no guarantee that every board will pick up and publish every listing. Users who expected one-click posting to specific boards sometimes found this approach frustrating. The feature was still rated highly by those who understood its limitations.
CRM for Recruiting Agencies
For staffing firms and recruiting agencies, CATS included CRM functionality designed to manage client relationships alongside candidate pipelines. This included a Client Review System that allowed recruiters to securely share candidate profiles with hiring managers at client companies and collect feedback. For agencies juggling multiple clients, this was useful. However, the CRM features were described by some users as limited compared to dedicated recruiting CRMs, particularly around scheduling and advanced communication tracking.
Browser Extensions for Sourcing
CATS offered Chrome and Firefox extensions that allowed recruiters to parse candidate information directly from LinkedIn, Monster, and CareerBuilder profiles into the CATS database. This reduced manual data entry significantly. The extensions were a practical time-saver for high-volume sourcers, though they required the browser to be compatible (some users reported Chrome compatibility issues over time).
Communication Tools
The platform supported bulk emailing, email marketing integrations (with tools like Constant Contact and Mailchimp), and SMS texting. SMS functionality was limited to the United States and Canada. One notable gap: CATS required manual email sending for most correspondence rather than offering automated email sequences triggered by pipeline changes. For recruiters accustomed to modern automation, this felt like a significant limitation.
Branded Career Portals
Users could create customizable career pages or embed a jobs widget on their existing company website via WordPress integration. The career portal supported custom branding, application forms, and candidate self-service. This was adequate for small businesses but lacked the design sophistication and SEO optimization tools found in more modern ATS career page builders.
Reporting
Reporting was consistently cited as CATS’ weakest area. The system offered basic, semi-customizable reports that could be exported to Excel, but users described the reporting tools as limited, hard to find within the interface, and insufficient for data-driven recruiting decisions. Custom reporting was not supported within the platform, and there were no SQL dump options. Several users noted that reports were adequate for basic pipeline visibility but fell short for any meaningful analytics.
CATS Pricing and Plans
CATS pricing has been reported inconsistently across sources, likely reflecting changes over time and the lack of transparent pricing from the vendor’s current website (which promotes a free trial but does not clearly display dollar amounts in publicly accessible content). Based on the most commonly cited figures:
| Billing Option | Price Per User/Month | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly Billing | $99 to $110 | Most recent sources cite $110/user/month |
| Annual Billing | $69 | Significant discount for annual commitment |
CATS appears to offer a single plan with all features included (no tiered feature gating). A free 7-day trial is available. Additional costs to be aware of:
- Data migration: $500 for annual plan subscribers, $1,000 for monthly plan subscribers
- No free plan: Only the 7-day trial is available at no cost
Given the uncertainty around the product’s long-term viability, we recommend confirming current pricing directly with the vendor before making any purchasing decision. Some review platforms list the starting price at $89/user/month, adding further ambiguity. The pricing was once considered competitive for the feature set, but with declining support and no visible product development, even the lower annual price is difficult to justify against actively maintained alternatives.
Integrations
CATS supported a reasonable set of integrations for a small-business ATS. Confirmed integrations based on vendor documentation and multiple third-party sources include:
- HRIS: BambooHR
- Communication: Slack, Gmail, Microsoft Outlook (via add-on), Microsoft Word (via add-on)
- Email Marketing: Constant Contact, Mailchimp
- Background Checks: Precise Hire, Checkr
- Automation/Middleware: Zapier
- File Storage: Google Drive
- CMS: WordPress (career page plugin/widget)
- Recruiting Tools: Pocket Recruiter, LinkMatch
- Telephony: 3CLogic
- Sourcing: LinkedIn, Monster, CareerBuilder (via browser extensions)
An API was available for custom integrations. However, the integration ecosystem was modest compared to competitors like Greenhouse or Jobvite, which offer hundreds of native integrations and active marketplaces. Given the product’s current state, we would not count on new integrations being developed or existing ones being maintained long-term.
Customer Support
CATS historically offered customer support via telephone and email, along with a knowledge base (help.catsone.com) containing articles across categories including candidates, career pages, jobs, integrations, reporting, and administration. Training videos were also available. Live chat support was not offered.
Support quality is the single most concerning aspect of CATS in its current state. While older reviews describe support as responsive and even praiseworthy (with mentions of “mini-custom user training sessions” and fast technical assistance), recent feedback tells a very different story. Multiple users report reaching out to support repeatedly with no response at all. One reviewer stated they “reached out 3 times and still never received a response.” Another described support as “unreliable.” The vendor’s profile inactivity on major review platforms further suggests a disengaged support operation. For any software purchase, reliable support is non-negotiable, and CATS no longer appears to deliver on this front.
Pros and Cons
Based on our analysis of user feedback patterns, the product’s feature set, and its current market position, here is our assessment of CATS’ strengths and weaknesses.
Pros
- Highly customizable hiring workflows that can be configured without coding, allowing agencies to match the system to their existing process
- Intuitive, easy-to-learn interface that new users can get productive on quickly with minimal training
- Effective resume parsing and instant document indexing with Boolean search and keyword highlighting
- Browser extensions for Chrome and Firefox streamline candidate sourcing from LinkedIn, Monster, and CareerBuilder
- CRM functionality with Client Review System is useful for recruiting agencies managing multiple client relationships
Cons
- Customer support has severely declined post-acquisition by Top Echelon, with multiple users reporting no response to repeated inquiries
- No native mobile app and the mobile browser experience is not well-optimized
- Reporting tools are limited, difficult to navigate, and do not support custom reports or data exports beyond basic Excel
- No built-in onboarding, background checking, or diversity recruiting features
- No automated email sequences; emails must be sent manually, which is a significant gap for high-volume recruiting
- Job board distribution relies on a master feed approach with no guarantee of publication on specific boards
- No visible product development or feature updates in recent years, raising serious concerns about long-term viability
Who Should Use CATS?
At this point, we find it difficult to recommend CATS to any new buyer. The product’s strengths (ease of use, affordable pricing, customizable workflows) are overshadowed by serious concerns about the vendor’s responsiveness, product development trajectory, and long-term viability.
If you are already using CATS and it meets your needs, there is no urgency to switch tomorrow. But we recommend beginning to evaluate alternatives now, particularly if you rely on vendor support for troubleshooting or if your team is growing and will need more sophisticated reporting, mobile access, or onboarding features that CATS does not provide.
Historically, CATS was best suited for small recruiting agencies (1 to 50 employees) and lean internal HR teams that needed an affordable, no-frills ATS. It served industries like staffing, professional services, healthcare, and finance. Companies that valued simplicity over feature depth and were comfortable with a web-only interface (no mobile app) got the most value from the platform.
CATS is not suitable for mid-size or large organizations, companies needing built-in onboarding or background check workflows, teams that require a mobile app, or any buyer who values strong vendor support and an actively developed product.
CATS Alternatives
Zoho Recruit
Zoho Recruit is a strong alternative for small businesses and agencies looking for an affordable, actively maintained ATS with significantly more features. It offers built-in AI matching, a mobile app, advanced reporting, and native integrations across the Zoho ecosystem. It is more complex to set up than CATS was, but the ongoing development and reliable support make it a much safer long-term choice. Choose Zoho Recruit if you want more capability at a similar or lower price point.
Workable
Workable targets companies with 1 to 500 employees and offers a modern, polished interface with AI-powered sourcing, automated actions, interview scheduling, and over 200 integrations. Its reporting tools far surpass what CATS offered. Pricing is higher (starting around $149/month for smaller teams), but the feature depth and active product development justify the premium. Choose Workable if you want a full-featured, modern ATS and have the budget for it.
Manatal
Manatal is a cloud-based ATS with AI-driven recommendations, a clean interface, and pricing starting at $15/user/month, making it one of the most affordable options on the market. It includes CRM functionality for agencies, social media enrichment, and a customizable pipeline. It lacks some enterprise features but is an excellent replacement for CATS for small teams that prioritized simplicity and cost-effectiveness.
Recruit CRM
For recruiting agencies specifically, Recruit CRM combines ATS and CRM functionality in a single platform with strong automation, email sequencing, a Kanban-style pipeline, and responsive customer support. It directly addresses the recruiting agency use case that CATS served, with better communication automation and a mobile app. Pricing starts at $85/user/month, putting it in a similar range to CATS.
Top Echelon
Since Top Echelon now owns CATS, their own ATS product is worth evaluating if you are being migrated or considering the ecosystem. Top Echelon is geared toward split-placement recruiting networks and small agencies. It offers CRM, pipeline management, and job board posting. However, user reviews for Top Echelon itself are mixed, and buyers should evaluate it independently rather than assuming it inherits CATS’ former strengths.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CATS ATS still available?
The CATS website (catsone.com) remains live and advertises a free trial as of our last check. However, the vendor’s profiles on major review platforms have gone inactive, customer support responsiveness has declined significantly according to recent user reports, and no meaningful product updates have been publicly announced. We consider CATS to be effectively in maintenance mode or sunset status.
Who owns CATS now?
CATS was acquired by Top Echelon, a recruiting software company based in Canton, Ohio. The CATS browser extension is now published under the Top Echelon name. The original CATS Software, Inc. was founded in Minneapolis, MN in 2005.
How much does CATS cost?
Pricing has been reported inconsistently, but the most commonly cited figures are $69/user/month with annual billing and $99 to $110/user/month with monthly billing. Data migration carries an additional fee of $500 (annual plan) or $1,000 (monthly plan). A free 7-day trial is available. We recommend confirming current pricing directly with the vendor.
Does CATS have a mobile app?
No. CATS does not offer a native mobile application for iOS or Android. The platform is web-based and accessible through mobile browsers, but users have noted that the mobile browser experience is not well-optimized.
What is OpenCATS, and is it related to CATS?
OpenCATS is a completely separate, open-source applicant tracking system. While CATS originally started as an open-source project before transitioning to a commercial SaaS product in 2007, OpenCATS is maintained independently and should not be confused with the commercial CATS (catsone.com) product.
Does CATS include onboarding or background check features?
CATS does not include built-in onboarding or background checking tools. For background checks, it integrates with third-party services like Precise Hire and Checkr. For onboarding, you would need a separate solution.
What languages does CATS support?
CATS has been reported to support multiple languages including English, French, German, Dutch, Finnish, Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Czech, Hebrew, Lithuanian, and Chinese (Simplified). However, given the product’s current state, we cannot confirm which languages remain actively supported.
The Bottom Line
CATS was, at one point, a genuinely good small-business ATS. It was affordable, easy to learn, and flexible enough for recruiting agencies to mold it to their workflows. For several years, it punched above its weight in a competitive category. Those days appear to be over.
The acquisition by Top Echelon has resulted in a product that shows every sign of being deprioritized: unresponsive support, inactive vendor presence on review platforms, no visible product roadmap, and a user base that increasingly feels abandoned. The feature set, while adequate for basic recruiting needs, now lags significantly behind actively developed competitors. There is no mobile app, no meaningful reporting, no onboarding tools, and no automated email sequences. The pricing, once a clear advantage, is no longer competitive when you account for the declining support and stagnant development.
If you are evaluating ATS software today, we recommend passing on CATS entirely. Manatal, Zoho Recruit, and Recruit CRM all offer more features, better support, and active development at comparable or lower price points. If you are a current CATS user, begin planning your migration now rather than waiting for a forced transition. The ATS market has moved forward significantly, and CATS has not kept pace.
