Most recruiters start with manual LinkedIn search. This comparison shows where that approach breaks down and what changes when you move to indexed OTW search with a built-in pipeline.
10xDeeper result browsing
32 minAvg shortlist time
28%Typical reply rate
Example query
- Keywords
- Product Manager AND SaaS
- Location
- Amsterdam
- Filters
- OTW + recently OTW
- Experience
- 5+ years
Feature comparison
| Capability | Manual LinkedIn | Hyranse |
|---|---|---|
| Search depth | Limited pages per session | Hundreds of indexed pages |
| OTW filters | Available but manual each time | Saved queries with OTW presets |
| Pipeline states | External spreadsheet | Viewed, saved, hidden built in |
| Unviewed screening | Not available | Dedicated unviewed tab |
| Contact enrichment | Separate tools | Email and phone by LinkedIn ID |
| Weekly throughput | ~50-80 profiles reviewed | 200+ with PRO plan |
| Time to shortlist | 60-90 minutes typical | 25-35 minutes typical |
When manual LinkedIn still works
One-off hires with tiny pools under 500 profiles can work manually. The gap appears when you run repeat searches, multi-role pipelines, or need 10-15 quality shortlists per week.
Try this query in the live demo — 5 candidates, no signup required.
Migration path
Start with your top three saved queries. Run them in the live demo and compare pool size and screening speed against your last manual session. Most teams switch one role family at a time.
Read also: LinkedIn Search Limits and When to Upgrade to PRO.
