Upload a PDF or Word resume and Revquix shows the exact text an applicant tracking system extracts, flags the layout problems it finds, and gives you a free ATS score out of 100, with no signup. It is free once a day without an account and 4 times a day with one, and the file check itself uses no AI.
At a glance
The output is your own resume as machine-readable text, in the order a parser reads it, with each layout problem it finds quoted from the file itself. It is the least impressive-looking report on this site and the only one nobody argues with.
Evidence
Not a percentage and not a grade - the literal text extracted from your file, in the order it comes out. If your two-column layout interleaves your job titles with your dates, you do not have to take our word for it: it is right there, in your own words, wrong.
No AI in the check
No model, no third-party API, no outbound request of any kind while your file is being checked. The ATS score is a separate step you choose, and it tells you exactly what it sends before it runs.
A score you can check
No applicant tracking system shows candidates a score, so every score is somebody's rubric. Ours is published and versioned: the same file gets the same number, and every point traces back to a weight you can read.
Actually free
One check and one score a day without signing in, four of each if you do - and signing in is optional forever. The full written report is the only thing here that costs credits, and you never need it to see your score.
Deterministic
Every check runs in our own code against fixed rules. Nothing here depends on a model's mood, the time of day, or which server answered - so a fix you make is a difference you can measure by running it again.
No brand names in this table on purpose. Prices and feature lists in this category move every few months, and a stale figure in somebody else’s column would undermine the one thing this page is actually selling - that its output is your own file and you can check every word of it.
A score is where the work starts. The score tells you where the points are. The full report goes through every finding for your resume, explains what to change, and rewrites your weakest bullets without inventing anything.
See the full reportYour file is processed to produce this result and then deleted - within 24 hours if you are not signed in, within 30 days if you are. Every result here is computed deterministically in our own code, never by an AI model, so the same file always produces the same report. The file check is also the one place we can promise more than deletion: no AI model and no outbound request of any kind while your file is being checked. The ATS score is a separate step, and it asks for your consent before any AI is involved.
Full detail in our privacy policy and AI policy.
What it checks, what it deliberately does not, and how to read the output.
This is a deterministic parseability check, and deliberately nothing more. It extracts the text from your file the way a parser does, then reports what it found: whether the reading order looks scrambled, as it often is in a multi-column layout, whether your contact block is machine-readable, whether section headings are recognisable, whether dates parse, and whether any of your content is trapped inside an image.
The centrepiece of the check is not a checklist. It is a panel showing the raw extracted text, verbatim, in the order a parser reads it. Nobody argues with their own resume rendered as garbled text.
The single most common reason a well-written resume fails machine screening is a two-column template. A human reads the sidebar as a sidebar; a parser reads whatever the PDF's internal drawing order gives it, which frequently interleaves your skills list into the middle of a job description.
The check compares the text in the file's own drawing order with the same text sorted by position on the page, and flags the layout when the two differ by a wide margin. That catches some multi-column layouts, not all of them: a sidebar template can pass the check and still interleave. The extracted text is the reliable test. Read it top to bottom, and if your sidebar lands inside a job description, switch to a single-column layout - it is the safe choice for any parser.
Some resumes are exported as a single flattened image, usually from a design tool. Those files are invisible to every applicant tracking system in existence - not scored badly, not read at all. When we find no extractable text, we say exactly that and treat it as the most important result this tool can produce, rather than showing you a generic upload error.
There is no OCR here, and that is intentional. Reading your image with OCR would tell you what the picture says, which is not the question. The question is what the parser gets, and the parser gets nothing.
After the check, one more click scores the same file out of 100. It is the Revquix Readiness Score, the number our AI Resume Analyzer gives, across eight weighted checks: parseability, structure, impact, skills, timeline, language, career trajectory and screening risk. You get the score, the breakdown and the three fixes worth making first.
No applicant tracking system shows candidates a score, so nobody outside a company can reproduce the one it uses. What this measures is the part you control: whether a parser can read your resume and whether a recruiter skimming it finds evidence. The rubric is published, and the same file gets the same score.
The score is the one step on this page that involves AI. A model reads which skills your bullets actually demonstrate, with your name, email and phone removed first, and it never picks the number. That is why the score asks for your consent and the check does not.
| Score | Band | Where to start |
|---|---|---|
| 85-100 | Excellent | Send it, and tailor it to each job description rather than chasing points |
| 70-84 | Strong | The top three fixes on the result, ranked by points recovered |
| 50-69 | Getting there | The top three fixes, then any section the result marks as missing |
| 0-49 | Needs work | Anything the ATS check marks as blocking, since an unreadable file caps at 55 |
The check will not judge your writing, and the score will not tell you how one particular company has configured its system - nobody outside that company can see that. The explanation of every fix for your resume, and rewrites of your weakest bullets, are in the full AI Resume Analyzer report.
The ones that come up before somebody uploads anything.
No. The check and one ATS score a day both run without an account and cost no credits. A free account raises that to 4 scores a day and adds 20 credits, enough for 10 full AI Resume Analyzer reports.
How well your resume survives a parser and a recruiter's first read, out of 100, across eight weighted checks from parseability to screening risk. No applicant tracking system shows candidates a score, so no outside tool can reproduce a company's own. This is our published rubric: the same file gets the same score, and every point is traceable.
85 and above is excellent, 70 to 84 is strong, 50 to 69 is getting there, and under 50 needs work. The bands are fixed thresholds rather than a model's opinion, so a 72 means the same thing next month. Most of the gain is usually in the first three fixes the score lists, which are ranked by points recovered for the effort.
Yes. Anything from 70 to 84 is in the strong band on our rubric: a parser can read the file and nothing structural is wrong, so the remaining points are about impact, skills evidence and wording. 85 and above is excellent. Under 70, start with the three fixes the result lists, because they are ranked by the points they recover.
Upload your resume as a PDF or .docx (up to 10 MB and 10 pages) on this page. The check shows the text a parser extracts in about five seconds; then tick the consent box and choose "Get my free ATS score", and the score out of 100 arrives in about fifteen, with the three fixes worth making first. It is free once a day without an account and 4 times a day with one. Legacy .doc files are refused rather than guessed at.
Applicant tracking system: the software an employer uses to collect applications, parse each resume into fields such as name, roles, dates and skills, and let recruiters search and filter them. A recruiter usually reads the parsed record rather than your original file, which is why this checker shows you that text first.
It can give you a number, but it is a guess. A chat model reads text you paste; it does not open your file the way an applicant tracking system does, so it cannot see the text a parser actually gets from your file or a PDF that is only an image, and asking twice can give two different numbers. This checker parses the real file, and the score is arithmetic over a published rubric that a model never chooses.
Yes, if the PDF contains real, selectable text. A scanned or image-only PDF has no text to read, a password-protected one fails at the first step, and a font that is not embedded can extract as the wrong letters. The checker tests for all three and shows you the text it actually extracted from your file.
Often badly. A parser reads a PDF in the order the file draws it, which for many two-column templates interleaves the sidebar into your job descriptions. The checker shows you the extracted text in that order and flags some multi-column layouts, but not every sidebar template is caught, so read the extracted text yourself. A single-column layout is the safe choice.
Unreliably. A table is read cell by cell, and the parser has to guess whether to go across rows or down columns; a wrong guess turns a skills grid into one unreadable line. The checker warns when your layout appears to use tables. Put each group of skills on its own line instead, such as "Backend: Java, Spring Boot".
A photo is not text, so a parser simply has nothing to read in it; whether a photo is welcome is the employer's convention, not the software's. What does cost you is text inside an image, such as a designed header, a skills graphic or contact details drawn as icons. The checker flags content trapped in images and contact details it cannot read.
That figure is repeated everywhere and has no primary source we can find. What an ATS reliably does is parse your file into fields that a recruiter searches, filters and reads. Screening questions on an application form can rule people out automatically, but that is an answer you gave, not your layout. The risk you control is a bad parse, which is what the extracted text on this page shows you.
Not by the check: it makes no outbound request of any kind while processing your file. The ATS score is a separate step you choose. It sends your resume's text, with your name, email and phone removed, to an AI model that reads which skills your bullets demonstrate. The model never chooses the number.
Anonymous uploads and their extracted text are deleted within 24 hours. If you are signed in, they are kept for 30 days so your history is useful, then deleted. Nothing you upload is used to train a model.
More from Resume & Profile, or browse the full catalogue.
Every automated check has a ceiling: it can tell you a bullet has no number in it, but it cannot decide which of your projects is worth two lines and which is worth six. A Revquix resume review is written by a person who hires for your target role.
Resume Review from ₹299Then the problem is not the file, and no checker will find it. Live sessions published by mentors on Revquix - an hour with someone who screens for your target role reads the resume the way the person rejecting it does.
Resume teardown, career roadmap & 2 mock interviews in one pack.
Sudhanshu Nautiyal · Revquix30 min: fix your resume & GitHub so recruiters actually call back.
Sudhanshu Nautiyal · RevquixLearn Java from the basics to advanced programming concepts
Rohit Parihar · Blue Yonder