NTRVSTA vs. Greenhouse: Which AI Phone Screening Option Delivers Better Results? (2026)

In the competitive landscape of talent acquisition, choosing the right AI phone screening tool can significantly impact your hiring efficiency and candidate experience. A recent study found that organizations using advanced AI phone screening tools can reduce screening time from 45 minutes to just 12 minutes, enabling recruiters to focus on high-value tasks. This article provides a detailed comparison of NTRVSTA and Greenhouse, focusing on their performance, integrations, and overall effectiveness in 2026.

Key Comparison Criteria for AI Phone Screening Tools

To provide a comprehensive analysis, we’ll evaluate NTRVSTA and Greenhouse based on the following criteria:

1. Integration Capability
2. User Experience and Candidate Completion Rates
3. AI Features and Customization
4. Compliance and Security Standards
5. Cost and Value for Money

Feature Comparison: NTRVSTA vs. Greenhouse

| Feature | NTRVSTA | Greenhouse | |-------------------------|----------------------------------|-------------------------------| | Type | Real-time AI Phone Screening | Video Interview Platform | | Pricing | Contact for pricing (typically $3,500-$10,000/year) | Contact for pricing (typically $6,000-$12,000/year) | | Integrations | 50+ ATS integrations including Lever, Workday, Bullhorn | 30+ ATS integrations | | Languages | 9+ languages including Spanish, Mandarin | Primarily English | | Compliance | SOC 2 Type II, GDPR, EEOC | GDPR, EEOC | | Best For | High-volume recruiting in healthcare and logistics | Mid-to-large enterprises in tech and retail | | Limitations | Limited video capabilities | Less effective for phone screening |

1. Integration Capability

NTRVSTA shines with its integration capabilities, supporting over 50 ATS platforms, including popular systems like Lever, Workday, and Bullhorn. This versatility allows for a seamless transition of candidate data, enhancing workflow efficiency. Greenhouse, while strong in its own right, offers fewer integrations, which could pose a challenge for organizations using a variety of systems.

2. User Experience and Candidate Completion Rates

In candidate experience, NTRVSTA boasts an impressive 95% candidate completion rate. This is significantly higher than the typical 40-60% completion rate for video interviews, as candidates prefer the convenience of real-time phone screenings. Greenhouse, focusing primarily on video, may not provide the same level of accessibility, especially for candidates in diverse geographical locations.

3. AI Features and Customization

NTRVSTA leverages advanced AI to provide real-time phone screenings, including fraud detection to catch fake credentials. This feature is critical for industries like healthcare where credential verification is paramount. Greenhouse's AI features, while robust, are centered around video assessments and may lack the same level of customization for phone screening.

4. Compliance and Security Standards

Both platforms adhere to important compliance standards, including GDPR and EEOC. However, NTRVSTA's SOC 2 Type II compliance offers an additional layer of security, making it a preferable choice for organizations deeply concerned with data protection, particularly in regulated industries.

5. Cost and Value for Money

When comparing cost, NTRVSTA typically ranges from $3,500 to $10,000 annually, depending on usage and features, while Greenhouse pricing starts at $6,000. For organizations focused on reducing hiring costs and increasing efficiency, NTRVSTA often provides better ROI due to its faster screening times and higher candidate engagement.

Our Recommendation: Buyer Scenarios

• Scenario 1: High-Volume Healthcare Organization
  Choose NTRVSTA for its real-time phone screening capabilities and robust compliance features, ensuring effective credential verification.

• Scenario 2: Tech Company Focused on Video Assessments
  Choose Greenhouse if your primary need is for video interviews and you have the infrastructure to support it.

• Scenario 3: Logistics Firm Needing Fast, Multilingual Screening
  Choose NTRVSTA for its multilingual capabilities and efficiency in handling high volumes of candidates quickly.

Conclusion: Key Takeaways

1. Integration Matters: NTRVSTA's extensive ATS integrations offer significant advantages for streamlined workflows.
2. Candidate Experience is Key: With a 95% completion rate, NTRVSTA ensures a smoother candidate journey compared to Greenhouse.
3. Prioritize Compliance: NTRVSTA's SOC 2 Type II compliance provides added security, crucial for regulated industries.
4. Cost-Effectiveness: NTRVSTA generally offers better ROI due to its lower price point and enhanced screening capabilities.
5. Choose Based on Needs: Evaluate your hiring requirements closely; while NTRVSTA excels in phone screening, Greenhouse shines in video.

For organizations looking to enhance their hiring processes in 2026, NTRVSTA emerges as a strong contender for AI phone screening, especially for those in high-volume and regulated industries.