What Jobma costs, and six video interview platforms that publish a price

I opened Jobma’s pricing page on 6 September 2026 and there isn’t a number on it. What’s there instead is a feature list, a demo button and a sales phone number, plus the line “We offer custom packages based on volume, integrations, and feature needs.” That’s a legitimate way to sell software. It’s also the reason people go looking for Jobma alternatives before they’ve even seen a quote, because you can’t build a shortlist out of six vendors when three of them won’t tell you what they charge.

So this post does the boring thing that most roundups skip. Real prices, pulled from each vendor’s own page on the same day, and a plain note where the vendor publishes nothing at all.

What Jobma does

Jobma is an async video interview platform. You record questions, candidates record answers on their own time, and your team reviews the replies later. It also does live video interviews, AI-led interviews, skills assessments, candidate verification and proctoring, and it plugs into most of the common applicant tracking systems.

The pitch is time. If you’ve got 80 applicants and four hiring managers, a 15-minute phone screen each is 20 hours of calendar you don’t have. One-way video collapses that into review time you can do at 8pm. Whether candidates like it is a separate question, and the honest answer is that a lot of them don’t.

Jobma alternatives, with prices checked on the same day

Every figure below came from the vendor’s own pricing page on 6 September 2026. I’ve written “no public price” where there wasn’t one, rather than repeating a number from a review site.

Willo is the one worth knowing about if you hire in bursts. Its pricing page lists Lite at $59 per live role per month with no contract, capped at 5 roles and 5 users. For a company filling three positions a quarter that’s a genuinely small number, and it’s the cheapest honest entry point in this group. Enterprise starts at $3,799 a year, with 10% off on a two-year term and 15% off on three.

Spark Hire has the clearest published structure of the lot. Its pricing page splits video interviewing from the full ATS, and the annual video plan at $249 a month buys unlimited jobs and unlimited users, where the $299 monthly plan caps you at five of each. If you’re going to use it for more than a quarter, the annual maths is not close.

HireVue and VidCruiter are both enterprise sales motions with no published number. HireVue is the name most candidates recognise, which cuts both ways: recognition reduces confusion, and it also means a chunk of applicants have already formed an opinion about being interviewed by a recording.

The cost that stays off the pricing page

Async video moves work rather than removing it. You save the scheduling, and you spend the review. Four managers watching 80 five-minute videos is 27 hours of viewing, and unlike a live screen it can’t be cut short at minute three when the answer is clearly no.

Then there’s the per-role maths, which changes the ranking of the Jobma alternatives above depending on how you hire. Willo Lite at $59 a role looks cheap until you’re running nine roles at once and hit the five-role cap. Spark Hire’s annual plan looks expensive at $249 a month until you divide it across fifteen open jobs, at which point it’s about $17 a job. Neither is wrong. They’re priced for different hiring shapes, and the mistake is picking on headline price rather than on your own requisition count.

There’s a second cost that’s harder to see. Candidates self-select out. The 2025 Stack Overflow Developer Survey found the large majority of professional developers are already employed and only passively open to moving, and passive candidates are exactly the group least willing to record answers into a webcam for a company they haven’t met. For high-volume, entry-level or shift-based hiring that trade is usually fine. For senior engineering roles I’d be careful, and I’d be surprised if the drop-off were small.

How to choose between the Jobma alternatives in one afternoon

Start from your requisition count and contract appetite, not from the feature grid. Almost all of these tools do async video, scorecards, branding and ATS syncing, so the grid rows mostly say yes and tell you nothing. What separates them is the billing shape and the cap.

• Hiring 3 to 10 roles a year, want no contract: Willo Lite at $59 per role.
• Want video plus an ATS in one bill: Spark Hire Recruit Pro.
• Video only, more than five open jobs: Spark Hire annual at $249, not the monthly plan.
• Large enterprise, procurement is involved anyway: HireVue or VidCruiter, and budget for the demo cycle.
• Need proctoring and assessments in the same tool: Jobma is still a reasonable answer, you just have to ring them.

Then run one real requisition through whichever you pick before signing anything annual. If you also need to compare the skills-testing layer that sits next to this, we’ve done the same price-checking exercise on Glider AI alternatives and what each platform actually tests.

What the anti-cheat features actually catch

Jobma sells candidate verification and proctoring, and so does most of this list. Willo lists anti-cheat on both of its plans. It’s worth knowing what that means in practice before you treat a flag as evidence.

Browser-based proctoring watches the browser. It can see that a tab lost focus, that a paste event fired, that the webcam went dark, or that the face on camera changed. It can’t see a second laptop, a phone leaning against a monitor, or a native desktop app drawing outside the recorded surface. That’s a structural limit rather than a gap any one vendor could close, and it applies across the platforms in this table.

Which changes how you should read a report. A clean proctoring result means nothing tripped the checks that this tool is able to run. Treating it as proof of anything stronger leads to rejecting honest candidates over a dropped webcam feed, which is a worse failure than the one you were guarding against. We’ve gone into the mechanics of that in what screen-share detection can and can’t see.

Where the live round still leaks

Async video handles the screen. It does nothing for the panel interview that follows, and that’s where the record usually gets worse rather than better. An interviewer types notes for the first ten minutes, listens properly for the middle twenty, then rebuilds the last stretch from memory afterwards. Scorecards get written hours later, and two interviewers who sat in the same call often disagree about what was said.

That’s the gap Craqly works in. It runs as a desktop app, follows the conversation on Zoom, Teams or Google Meet, and gives the interviewer structured notes and follow-up prompts while the call is still going, so the scorecard comes off a transcript instead of recall. The free Starter plan is 20 credits a month, where one credit is one minute of live session and credits reset monthly. Paid plans start at $19 a month billed yearly, $38 month to month, checked on 6 September 2026. Our notes on the questions recruiters actually ask cover the round on the other side of it.

One thing I’d bet on, and could be wrong about: the quote-only vendors in this table will start publishing entry prices within a couple of years. Buyers now compare six tabs before they talk to anybody, and a page with no number loses that comparison quietly, without ever showing up as a lost deal.