Who should be called first, and why?
Ranked by signal strength, strongest first. Click a row to lens the whole dashboard onto that employer; click it again to release it. "See the roles" opens the postings the line was counted from.
Who should you ring on Monday?
The names, and the postings that put each one on the list.
Who is building a team rather than backfilling one seat?
Several roles in one discipline inside one window is an expansion, and the opening for a retained brief rather than a single contingent placement.
Who has only recently appeared in this market?
Who is posting materially more than they were?
Who has gone quiet after hiring steadily?
A stop is not always a freeze. It is as often a brief that went to somebody else, or an internal hire, and either is a reason to ring.
Which disciplines moved this week?
Where is the hiring, and which way is it moving?
Volume, mix and direction across the roles the filters leave in view.
Almost everything below is clickable: a month, a discipline, a seniority, a region or a slice lenses every other page onto it. Click the same mark again to release it.
How does the cohort compare with the rest?
| Group | Roles | Share | Employers | Remote | Median days to close |
|---|
How has posting volume moved across the full history?
Which parts of the market are heating, and which are cooling?
Which disciplines are hiring?
Bars are the roles in view. The movement table below them compares each group's share of the current window with its share of the one before it, in percentage points, so a group can grow in count and still lose ground.
Which seniorities are being hired for?
Seniority is inferred from the posting title and body, so a title that carries no level signal falls into the unclassified group rather than being guessed at.
Where in the country is the hiring?
Where inside the country is the hiring?
Which places are named most often?
The place written on the posting, cleaned but not re-geocoded. A national or multi-site advert names no place and is counted in the missing share above.
How is the work arranged?
Read from the posting's own wording.
Permanent or contract?
Contract type as advertised. Where a posting states nothing it is counted as unstated rather than assumed permanent.
Which roles have stopped moving?
Which disciplines are stalling?
Which seniorities are stalling?
Same clock as the chart on the left, cut by level instead. A senior band with a long tail is a search problem; a junior band with a long tail is usually a pay or location problem.
Where do adverts run longest?
How long is a role advertised for, by seniority?
How long is a role advertised for, by discipline?
A wide band is the useful part. Where p25 and p75 sit far apart the median is a weak summary and the long tail is where an introduction is worth most.
Which titles stall longest?
Which titles close quickest?
The counterweight. A title that closes in days is one the employer can serve itself, and quoting it alongside the slow list is what makes the slow list credible rather than a sales line.
The stalled roles themselves
What is the market actually advertising?
How much of this market advertises pay at all?
What does each level pay?
What does each discipline pay?
Which levels are willing to publish a figure?
Counts of roles in view, not pay. This chart does follow the filter bar. A level with a high count and no band above it has the rows but not the agreement between them; a level with neither is a level nobody is publishing on.
Which disciplines are willing to publish a figure?
Which employers changed, and is the change real?
Movement, uncontested lanes, and the names we have only just started collecting.
Newly-collected employers are marked, because a coverage event and a hiring surge look identical in the counts and mean opposite things on a call.
Which employers moved most, and is the move real?
Each card carries the trajectory behind the number. A card marked New coverage means we only began collecting that employer inside the comparison window: there is no prior window to compare against, so the change is withheld rather than guessed at.
Who is accelerating?
Who is cooling?
Which lanes is only one employer posting in?
A discipline-and-seniority pairing with open roles at exactly one employer. Read it as category leadership or as an uncontested lane, and read a lane holding a single posting as the thin claim it is. The count is printed so you can tell them apart.
Every tracked employer, in one place
What are employers asking for that they were not?
Named skills, and the ones named more than a window ago.
Which skills are rising, and which are fading?
Which skills are asked for most?
Counts, not directions. A skill listed here with only a handful of mentions is a count you can quote and a trend you cannot. Click one to trend it.
How has this skill moved?
How much experience is being asked for?
Which roles are actually open right now?
Every posting the current filters leave standing, with the account list above it.
Search and sort on this page narrow this table only. The filter bar above still governs every other page. Click an employer to lens everything on them.
What does each employer's book look like right now?
One row per employer in the current view, ranked by what they still have open. "Why call" is assembled from the counts to its left and states nothing the rows do not already say. The export writes every employer in the view, not only the ones drawn here, and carries the filters that produced it in the file header.
Which roles are these?
How far can this build be trusted?
What this build reached, what it could not, and how every derived field was derived. Read this before you read a month-on-month move anywhere else.
Did we collect evenly, period by period?
Where does every role's opening date come from?
How was each derived field actually derived?
Every classified field carries the method that produced it. A language model reading the posting is the primary path; the ML tier and the rule tier are fallbacks used when it is unavailable or unsure, and "not derived" means the field was left empty rather than guessed. A build leaning on the fallbacks is still usable, it is simply less confident, and you can see how much.
Which fields are populated, and which are thin?
Measured over the roles still live in this build. The bar is the share of rows carrying a value; the count beside each label is the number of rows without one. A missing field is left blank everywhere on this dashboard. It is never filled with an average, a guess or a zero.
Which employers did we actually reach?
"Reached" means the employer's careers feed answered on the last run and returned rows. An employer marked failed is not an employer that stopped hiring: their roles are simply absent from every figure on this dashboard until the feed answers again. Paused employers were switched off in the pack and are excluded from the reached count.
What should be said out loud?
The caveats this build generated about itself. They are worth repeating in a client meeting: stating them is what makes the rest of the numbers credible.