Seven things people say about applicant tracking systems that are not quite true
A sorting of common claims about screening software into what is true, what is half true and what is simply folklore, so you can stop worrying about the wrong things.
By Avowly · Last reviewed 6 November 2026 · 5 min read · How we write these
In short
- Most systems store and organize applications. Recruiters still search and read them.
- A score is a guide to obvious problems, not a verdict. Keyword stuffing and hidden text do harm.
- A PDF with selectable text is usually fine. Scans and pictures of text are not.
- Plain structure, real text and honest wording solve most of the real risk.
Few topics in job hunting attract as much confident folklore as applicant tracking systems. Some of what people say is useful. A lot of it is half understood, passed along from friends and short videos, and it makes people either anxious or careless.
Here are seven common claims, sorted into what is closer to the truth. One caution applies to all of them: each company sets up its own system, and nobody outside a company can see exactly what it does with your file. So treat these as general patterns, not guarantees.
Myth 1: A robot rejects most resumes before a person sees them
Closer to the truth: In most companies, these systems store and organize applications, and recruiters search and read them. Some employers use filters for basic questions, such as whether you have the right to work in a country or hold a required license. An automatic rejection of a well qualified applicant because of a hidden score is far less common than the stories suggest.
What does happen is that a resume which cannot be read properly, because of a layout problem, may be stored with missing or garbled details. That is the real risk, and you can fix it.
Myth 2: You need a perfect score
Closer to the truth: A single number cannot capture how a human will judge a resume, and different tools calculate scores in different ways. A score from a checking tool is a guide to obvious problems, such as unreadable layout or missing sections, and nothing more. Chasing one hundred percent can push you into stuffing words and bending your resume out of shape.
Myth 3: More keywords always help
Closer to the truth: Using the employer's own terms where they truly describe your work helps. Repeating them again and again, or adding a block of terms, does not. People notice it immediately, and some systems flag it. Write natural sentences that include the important terms once or twice.
Before
Skills: forklift, forklift driver, forklift operator, forklift operations, forklift safety.
After
Forklifts: counterbalance and reach truck, with pre-use checks done and logged at the start of each shift.
Why it works: One word repeated five times told the reader nothing new. Asking him which trucks he drives and what he checks gave a line that uses the term once and backs it up.
Myth 4: White text with hidden keywords is a clever trick
Closer to the truth: It is easy to detect, and when it is found, it can end your application. It also misleads, which is the opposite of what a resume is for. Leave it alone.
Myth 5: PDFs are always unreadable by these systems
Closer to the truth: A PDF exported from a word processor or a resume builder, with real selectable text, is read by most modern systems. The trouble comes from scanned pages and pictures of text, which contain no words to read. Whenever an application tells you to use a certain file type, follow it.
Myth 6: Only plain, boring layouts survive
Closer to the truth: You do not need an ugly resume. You need clear structure, standard headings, real text and a sensible reading order. Many well designed resumes pass without trouble, and a simple one built badly can fail. The test is how the text reads when copied into a plain editor, not how plain the page looks.
Myth 7: Everything depends on the system, not the person
Closer to the truth: Software is one stage. People decide who gets an interview. A resume that reads easily to a person, shows clear relevant results and matches what the job asks for does well in both. Spend more energy on the content than on guessing at the machine.
Said often
A robot rejects most resumes before a person sees them
Closer to the truth
Recruiters usually search and read them. The real risk is a file that cannot be read.
Said often
You need a perfect score
Closer to the truth
A score is a guide to obvious problems, not a verdict on you.
Said often
Hidden keywords are a clever trick
Closer to the truth
They are easy to spot and can end an application.
Each company sets up its own system, so what yours does can differ.
What is worth doing
Three habits cover nearly all the real risk.
- Keep the structure plain. Single column or a very simple second area, standard headings, dates in one style, contact details in the main body.
- Use real text. No pictures of words, no information that lives only in a chart or an icon.
- Use the employer's terms where they are true. Reflect the posting's language where it truly fits what you did.
Then check your file. Copy its text into a plain editor and read it. Run a free check, and fix anything it points out.
What no one can tell you
Each employer's system is different, and the settings are private. Any advice that promises to beat all of them is overselling. What you can do is remove the avoidable problems and put your best evidence where a person will see it.
Common questions
- Do all companies use these systems?
- Many larger employers do, and smaller ones may use simpler tools or none at all. You cannot always tell, so build your resume to work for both people and software.
- Should I worry about a low score from a checking tool?
- Look at what it points out. If it finds real layout or structure problems, fix them. Do not bend your resume to chase a number.
- Does a plain resume get more interviews?
- Not by itself. A clear, relevant resume does. Plainness helps only when it makes the content easier to read and extract.