How is this different from searching in a recruiter seat tool?

Recruiter seat tools filter by title keywords, location, and industry. They do not carry employer-level signals like headcount growth, funding stage, or team-size changes.

Can I filter for candidates who recently changed jobs?

Yes. The People Search API includes a recently_changed_jobs boolean filter.

How up to date are candidate profiles?

People records are enriched from 15+ sources. Database profiles reflect the most recent data available at query time.

How much does candidate sourcing cost?

People Search is 3 credits per 100 results returned. People Enrichment is 3 credits per profile from the database, or 5 credits with real-time enrichment.

Source candidates your recruiters can't find on job boards.

Recruiter tools search the same index as your competitors. Filter 1B+ profiles by employer growth, funding stage, and team size to find passive candidates using your logic.

Book a demo

Read API docs

Your competitors use the same recruiting tools and find the same candidates.

Title matches flood your pipeline with irrelevant profiles.

A search for "VP of Engineering" returns hundreds of results. Most are title-keyword matches at companies you would never recruit from. You spend hours filtering manually because the tool has no employer-context filters to narrow the list.

Batch refresh shows outdated candidate profiles.

No way to filter by the company a candidate works at.

Every recruiter tool gives you the same keyword-filtered view of the same profiles. The candidates your competitors miss work at companies those tools cannot describe.

Your competitors use the same recruiting tools and find the same candidates.

Title matches flood your pipeline with irrelevant profiles.

Batch refresh shows outdated candidate profiles.

No way to filter by the company a candidate works at.

Every recruiter tool gives you the same keyword-filtered view of the same profiles. The candidates your competitors miss work at companies those tools cannot describe.

Your competitors use the same recruiting tools and find the same candidates.

Title matches flood your pipeline with irrelevant profiles.

Batch refresh shows outdated candidate profiles.

No way to filter by the company a candidate works at.

Every recruiter tool gives you the same keyword-filtered view of the same profiles. The candidates your competitors miss work at companies those tools cannot describe.

What changes when you filter candidates by employer context

Today

With Crustdata

Search by title keyword and location. Get 700 results, manually filter to 200.

Filter 1B+ profiles by title, skills, seniority, employer growth rate, funding stage, and team size.

Candidate data refreshes every 30 to 45 days. Profiles show outdated titles.

People records reflect live profile data. Enrichment pulls from 15+ sources on demand.

No employer-context filters. You cannot filter by company funding or headcount growth.

Identify target employers first with 95+ company filters, then find every candidate who works there.

Same candidate pool as every agency using the same seat license.

Company-context filters surface candidates that keyword-only tools structurally cannot reach.

Find candidates by the environment they work in

Define your ideal candidate by combining professional attributes with employer characteristics. Filter on title, seniority, skills, years of experience, geography, and employer growth signals in a single query.

title

employer_growth_rate

funding_stage

Identify high-growth employers first, then find every candidate inside them

The strongest passive candidates work at companies growing fast enough that they are fully engaged. Start by identifying target employers using headcount growth, funding recency, and employee count.

headcount_growth

last_funding_date

employee_count