Why this score?
The overall score is not meant to be the only “correct” way to judge a resume. It is designed to be explainable (you can see what drove the score) and actionable (you know what to change next).
The dimensions (what they measure)
Gate (deliverability)
If you miss critical sections, your score is capped (e.g. summary-only, missing education for campus, not enough outcome bullets).
Highlights strength
How strong your top 1–2 achievements are (the “wow” bullets).
Evidence density
How consistently bullets prove impact (actions + outcomes, ideally with numbers).
Direction clarity (no JD)
How clearly your resume points to one target role. Add a JD to get a more targeted Fit score.
Fit (with JD)
How well your resume matches a specific job description (skills, responsibilities, keywords).
ATS readiness
How usable your resume is for ATS/recruiters to extract and search signals (sections, dates, keywords).
Scoring standards (practical checks you can apply)
Gate (deliverability)
- If you miss critical sections, your score is capped (e.g. summary-only, missing education for campus, missing work for experienced, or <2 outcome bullets).
- Caps exist to prevent sparse resumes from scoring high even if the wording looks polished.
Highlights strength
- At least 1–2 standout bullets: action + scope + outcome (ideally with metrics).
- Prefer high-signal achievements (performance, cost, reliability, revenue, users) over generic responsibilities.
Evidence density
- Across core entries, bullets consistently show results: metrics, scale, impact, ownership.
- Bullets follow STAR/XYZ: what you did + how + outcome.
- Responsibilities-only bullets reduce the score.
Direction clarity (no JD)
- Headline/Summary states a target role and seniority (e.g. "Backend Engineer (Java)").
- Skills + projects + experience tell one coherent story (avoid a scattered, unrelated list).
- Tip: add a JD to get a more targeted Fit score and missing keywords.
Fit (with JD)
- Skills match: your listed skills cover must-haves in the JD.
- Responsibilities match: your bullets prove you did similar work.
- Keywords match: role-specific terms appear naturally inside evidence-based bullets (no stuffing).
ATS readiness
- Core sections exist: Experience or Projects, plus Skills and (often) Education.
- Entries have extractable signals: roles, org/project names, and dates where possible.
- Use role-relevant keywords naturally so ATS + recruiters can find you (no stuffing).
How the overall score is aggregated
Weighted sum (weights are part of the explanation)
A simple, transparent approach: each dimension contributes by a predefined weight.
No JD provided
Highlights strength · Evidence density · Direction clarity · ATS readiness (plus Gate caps)
JD provided
Highlights strength · Evidence density · Fit (JD match) · ATS readiness (plus Gate caps)
Hard penalties (critical issues)
Some problems are disproportionately harmful. Examples: broken/unclear timeline, completely unparseable ATS format, or zero outcomes/metrics across core roles. These can trigger a direct deduction (e.g. 10–20 points) even if other areas look fine.
What makes the score credible
- It explains “why you are 68 and not 80” with specific, checkable reasons.
- It gives concrete next steps (what to add/remove/change) rather than vague advice.
- The dimensions are a reasonable backbone, but not the only valid framework.
Want a personalized breakdown?
Paste your resume (and optionally a job description). We’ll show the weakest dimension first and what to fix.