Loxo and hireEZ both score 4.6 on G2, both promise AI-powered recruiting, and both show up when you search for a way to source better. That similarity is misleading. Loxo wants to be the one platform you run your whole desk on: applicant tracking, CRM, sourcing, and outreach in a single tool. hireEZ wants to be the deepest way to find candidates across the open web, then hand them to whatever system you already use. So the real question is not which is better. It is whether your problem is a scattered tool stack or a shortage of the right people.
This is a neutral read, with pricing taken from Loxo's published page and from procurement data on hireEZ, not the sales pitch. At the end is the honest part about what each one leaves out, and a lighter third option worth knowing about, one that happens to plug into Loxo for free. If you are still mapping the whole field, our guide to LinkedIn Recruiter alternatives lines both of these up against the rest.
The short answer
Loxo is the all-in-one platform. One subscription gives you an ATS, a recruiting CRM, a sales CRM for business development, sourcing through Loxo Source, and omni-channel outreach, with native AI layered across all of it. Loxo names an entry price in public, which most of this category does not, though since the 2026 repackage that price is annual and paid up front and the free tier is gone. It is built for agencies and executive search teams that want to stop paying for five tools and run everything in one place.
hireEZ is the specialist sourcing engine. It pulls candidate profiles from 45-plus open-web sources into an 800M-plus profile base, enhances your Boolean strings with AI, and runs multi-channel outbound to reach the people it finds. It does not publish pricing, sells on annual contracts, and integrates with your ATS rather than replacing it. It is built for teams whose bottleneck is finding enough of the right passive candidates, especially for hard-to-fill roles.
If your problem is tool sprawl and you need a system of record, Loxo. If your problem is discovery and you already have an ATS you like, hireEZ. The rest of this article is the detail behind that split.
Pricing, side by side
The clearest difference before you open either product is that Loxo publishes a number and hireEZ does not. That difference narrowed in 2026. Loxo now publishes two promotional floors and quotes everything above them, so what you are really comparing is a partial price against no price at all.
Loxo lists three plans, read off loxo.co/pricing on August 29, 2026. Core starts at $149 per user per month and Professional starts at $199, both billed annually and paid up front. Enterprise is custom. Two things the page does not put in large type: both published prices carry a new customer limited time offer line, so neither is a standing rate, and the free forever plan Loxo was known for is gone, replaced by a seven-day trial. The full breakdown is in Loxo pricing in 2026.
hireEZ keeps pricing behind a demo. Buyer data puts Starter around $169 per seat per month for up to three users, Professional around $199, and Enterprise custom at $250-plus, with Vendr's dataset showing a median contract of $13,000 a year and a normal range of $6,600 to $25,000. Credit overages and one-time implementation fees push the real bill above the per-seat sticker. The full picture is in hireEZ pricing in 2026.
The practical read: the two entry prices sit closer than ever, $149 against roughly $169, and the buying experience has converged as well. Loxo used to let you start free and pay monthly. Now both vendors want a year committed up front, and the difference that survives is that Loxo tells you a number before the call while hireEZ tells you nothing. Both negotiate like enterprise SaaS, so a competitor quote in hand still helps.
The full comparison
| Dimension | Loxo | hireEZ |
|---|---|---|
| Primary job | All-in-one platform: ATS, CRM, sourcing, outreach in one | Specialist sourcing: find candidates across the open web |
| Pricing transparency | Two published floors, both promotional; everything above them quoted | Sales-led, no public pricing, annual only |
| Entry price | From $149/user/mo (Core), annual and prepaid; no free tier | ~$169/seat/mo (Starter), median contract ~$13K/yr |
| Billing | Annual, paid up front (monthly withdrawn in 2026) | Annual only |
| Sourcing depth | Loxo Source on a vendor-claimed 850M+ profile graph, Professional tier only, 2,500 credits per seat per month | Vendor-claimed 800M+ profiles across 45+ sources; sourcing is the whole product |
| System of record | Yes: built-in ATS and CRM | No: integrates with your ATS, does not replace it |
| Outreach | Omni-channel campaigns (Professional tier) | Multi-channel sequences (email, SMS, InMail) |
| Business development | Sales CRM and account-based prospecting built in | Not a focus; recruiting-only |
| Best for | Agencies and search firms consolidating a tool stack | Teams whose bottleneck is finding candidates |
Where Loxo pulls ahead
Loxo's advantage is consolidation. For an agency, the subscriptions are only part of the cost. The rest is the hours lost bouncing between an ATS, a separate CRM, a sourcing tool, and an outreach app, each with its own login and bill. Loxo folds all of that into one platform, plus a sales CRM and account-based prospecting for winning new clients, which is the half of agency work most sourcing tools ignore. At $149 a seat the consolidation case is arithmetic you can do yourself: add up what those four tools cost you a year and put the total next to $1,788. For a team genuinely running all four, the bundle usually wins before you count a single feature.
The second advantage used to be how you buy, and 2026 took most of it away. The free forever ATS is now a seven-day trial, and monthly billing has gone, so the low-commitment on-ramp that made Loxo easy to recommend has closed. What survives is that Loxo still names a price in public. The more durable advantage is the AI, built into the workflow rather than bolted on: natural-language search, an AI notetaker, self-updating CRM and contact-finding agents, and a Loxo MCP that connects your database to the AI assistants you already use.
The tradeoff is discovery depth, and it needs more care than it used to. Loxo now advertises Loxo Source on a graph of 850M-plus professionals, which is a larger number than the 800M-plus hireEZ advertises. Treat both as marketing figures rather than measurements. Neither vendor publishes how its count is built or deduplicated, and raw profile totals have never been what separates these two. What separates them is that sourcing is the entire product at hireEZ and one module at Loxo, and buyers still rate hireEZ stronger at reaching passive, hard-to-find people. Note also that Loxo puts its graph behind the $199 tier with a monthly credit allowance, where the old pricing page advertised it as unlimited.
Where hireEZ pulls ahead
hireEZ's advantage is finding people. It aggregates across 45-plus open-web sources into an 800M-plus profile base, and buyers consistently rate its search and database stronger for actually discovering candidates, especially passive ones who are not already in a system. It also lets you paste existing Boolean strings and enhances them with AI, so migrating from traditional sourcing is smoother than starting fresh, and it runs multi-channel outbound (email, SMS, InMail) to reach the people it finds.
For a team whose real problem is the top of the funnel, not enough qualified candidates entering the pipeline, that sourcing depth is the reason to pick hireEZ over an all-in-one. It also integrates with 40-plus ATSs, so it drops into an existing stack without forcing you off the system of record you already run.
The tradeoff is that hireEZ is not that system of record. It does not give you a full ATS and CRM to run placements, client workflows, or business development the way Loxo does. And the opacity has a cost: no public pricing, credit overages, and implementation fees that push the real bill above the per-seat sticker, plus annual contracts that some buyers report jumping sharply at renewal. One note on names: hireEZ was called Hiretual until early 2022, so older reviews under that name describe the same product.
The honest part: one is a system, the other is an engine
Here is what the head-to-head framing hides. Loxo and hireEZ are not really competing for the same slot. Loxo is the system you run your desk on, the place your jobs, candidates, clients, and pipeline live. hireEZ is an engine you point at the open web to find people, then feed into whatever system you keep. That is why plenty of agencies run Loxo as their platform and still bolt on a deeper sourcing tool when a hard-to-fill role demands it.
So the buying decision is less "which tool wins" and more "which gap is bigger right now." If your recruiting lives in a mess of disconnected tools and you need one system to run it, start with the platform. If your system is fine but you cannot find enough of the right passive candidates, start with the sourcing engine. And if both feel broken, the mistake is committing to two heavy platforms before you know which one moves your numbers. That is where a lighter sourcing layer earns a look first, especially one that plugs into the system you already picked.
A lighter third option that pairs with Loxo: Glozo
If your bottleneck is finding the right people, the half hireEZ owns, it is worth putting a lighter tool next to your platform before you commit to an enterprise sourcing contract.
Glozo is a sourcing and talent intelligence platform that competes on the intelligence layer rather than database size. It runs intent-based search: you describe the person in plain language and a Skill Graph weights candidates on what they have actually done, across 30-plus sources. Two signals target the waste that makes sourcing expensive. A Market Compensation Estimate puts a live salary range on each person, so you stop chasing people out of band, and an "Open to Offers" signal reads receptivity from behavior, surfacing passive candidates before you spend a credit. It runs on 10M-plus market signals a month, and pricing is transparent and usage-based.
The part that matters for this comparison: Glozo paid plans include a free integration with Loxo. So a Loxo agency can add Glozo's sourcing intelligence without a separate integration project, vendor evaluation, or data migration. You keep Loxo as the system of record and add the discovery-and-intelligence layer on top, which is exactly the pairing hireEZ would otherwise fill at a heavier price. The honest framing: Glozo is a newer product with less brand recognition than either of these, it is not an ATS or CRM, and it does not try to match hireEZ's full outbound-automation suite. What it does is find the right people when their titles do not match your search and stop you wasting outreach on people who are out of budget or not moving.
How to choose
Pick Loxo if your problem is tool sprawl, you want an ATS, CRM, sourcing and business development in one system, and a published entry price matters to you more than a long trial. It fits agencies and search firms especially well. Price Professional rather than Core if the sourcing graph and the agents are the reason you are looking at all, because the gap is $50 a seat and Core does not include them. Seven days is not long to judge an applicant tracking system, so go in with a sample data set and the three workflows you need to prove.
Pick hireEZ if your bottleneck is finding candidates, you source outbound at volume across hard-to-fill roles, and you already have an ATS you are keeping. Get an itemized quote (seat, credits, implementation), and run one real campaign on the trial before you sign an annual contract.
Look at a lighter sourcing tool like Glozo if the discovery half is your problem and both feel like too much commitment to start, or if your real cost is wasted outreach on people who are out of budget or not moving. If you run Loxo, the free integration makes Glozo a coexistence question, not a replacement one. Whatever you pick, name the bottleneck first and buy for that. For the wider category, see our guides to AI recruiting tools by category and SeekOut vs hireEZ for the other side of hireEZ.