What We Learned From 87,000 Candidate Experiences in 2025

“Hiring is no longer about predicting who will repeat the past. It’s
about identifying who can succeed next.”

Charlotte Melkert, CEO at Equalture

That shift sounds clear in theory. In practice, however, many hiring processes still rely on outdated signals such as CVs, late-stage assessments, and interviews that reward confidence over capability. As a result, recruitment funnels are under pressure. Early drop-off is high, AI is changing how candidates interact with assessments, and candidate experience directly impacts hiring speed, cost, and quality.

To move the conversation from opinion to evidence, Equalture publishes its Annual Candidate Experience Report. The 2025 edition is based on feedback from 87,180 candidates who completed Equalture’s game-based assessments as part of real hiring processes across roles, industries, and seniority levels.

The insights below show what we learned about modern hiring.

Why this report exists

Game-based assessments are becoming more widely used, but skepticism remains:

Do they work across different roles?
Are they suitable for frontline as well as leadership hiring?
Do they truly support fairer and more inclusive selection?

Rather than answering these questions with beliefs or anecdotes, this report looks at candidate experience at scale, measured immediately after assessment completion, anonymously and within real recruitment flows.

Key insights from 87,180 candidates

Candidate experience is consistently high

Candidates rated their experience with Equalture’s game-based assessments 4.44 out of 5 on average. More than 88% gave a 4- or 5-star rating, while fewer than 2% give a 1-star rating.

This is notable because assessments are traditionally one of the weakest points in the candidate journey. The results show that short, mobile-friendly, game-based assessments are better aligned with modern hiring needs, reducing friction and early-stage drop-off in organisations hiring at scale.

Experience is consistent across roles and industries

Candidate experience remains consistently high across:

Frontline and volume roles
Technical and manufacturing positions
Professional and leadership functions

Ratings are tightly clustered across job categories, indicating that game-based assessments scale effectively across complexity levels and industries.

No meaningful gap between blue- and white-collar candidates

Traditional assessments often disadvantage frontline candidates due to long formats or heavy reading requirements. The data shows no meaningful difference in experience between blue- and white-collar roles, confirming that low-barrier assessment design works across hiring contexts.

Neurodivergent candidates report equally positive experiences

Candidates with profiles such as AD(H)D, autism, dyslexia, OCD, and colour blindness rate their experience at levels comparable to the overall average. Behaviour-based, low-language formats reduce common barriers found in traditional tests, without requiring separate tools or accommodations.

Behaviour-based assessments are more resilient in an AI-driven world

Classical cognitive tests and self-report questionnaires are increasingly vulnerable to AI-assisted completion. Game-based assessments are harder to manipulate because performance emerges from dynamic behaviour over time, not static answers.

Why this matters for recruitment leaders

Candidate experience is no longer just an employer-branding topic. The data shows a clear link between positive candidate experience and operational hiring outcomes.

Organisations using game-based assessments benefit from:

Lower early-stage funnel drop-off
Higher and more consistent completion rates
Reduced exposure to AI-assisted manipulation
Inclusive assessment at scale
One assessment approach across frontline, professional, and leadership roles

This translates into faster time-to-hire, lower cost per hire, stronger funnel conversion, and more confidence that assessment results reflect real potential rather than test-taking ability.