LandOfferJob search
Teal vs. Huntr: Which Job Tracker Fits a Multi-Role Search?
Teal and Huntr differ most in free capacity, shared resume facts, board organization and material portability, not abstract all-in-one rankings.
Choose Teal when a large search needs one shared work history and unlimited free job records. Choose Huntr when separate boards, custom stages and role-linked document packets better match how you work, provided its free 100-job limit fits your retained records. Start with what happens when you update, misfile or export a role.
LandOffer publishes this guide and offers job-search tools. This comparison uses official public documentation checked on October 8, 2026; it does not report a signed-in test or measured application outcomes. The two worked cases are fictional. If your current spreadsheet already preserves the same information reliably, keeping it is a reasonable decision. To find roles for that routine, browse jobs posted within the last 24 hours, then check the employer destination before applying.
Compare the same six tasks
Searching across backend, platform and data roles creates two kinds of information. Some facts should stay consistent: employment dates, qualifications and what you actually did. Other details belong to one opportunity: its requirements, the resume sent, a contact's reply and the next action. A useful tracker preserves that distinction and keeps weekly updates manageable.
The following matrix compares documented organization behavior. It does not rank generated writing, autofill accuracy or hiring effectiveness. Those would require different evidence.
| Task | Teal | Huntr | Decision consequence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capture a role | Extension or manual entry; documented capture includes the job description | Browser capture and board records; choose the intended board | Save the source description and employer identity, then verify the record |
| Maintain stages | Tracker stages and grouping by status | Boards with custom lists | Choose stages you will update, rather than copying every possible hiring step |
| Keep role context | Notes, contacts and associated materials | Contacts can link to jobs or boards; document storage and application packets | Keep contact notes and the actual sent version close to the role |
| Manage resume facts | Resume versions share work history | Application packets start from a selected base resume | Shared facts help consistency; distinct bases may suit different research tracks |
| Export records | Tracker's Export Report; resume export is PDF | Download My Data produces a ZIP containing typed CSV files | Treat record export and submitted-document backup as separate tasks |
| Stay free at volume | Unlimited tracked jobs and resumes advertised | Free plan lists 100 jobs and uploads | Count retained records, not only the filtered active view |
Teal's tracking guide describes the capture, notes and export workflow. Huntr's board guide describes custom lists and an important restriction: a job cannot be moved between boards; a record on the wrong board must be recreated. Neither description proves that your particular browser page will import perfectly.
Case one: Omar needs one reliable history
Omar is pursuing backend and platform roles. He has 132 retained job records, of which 27 need attention this week. His work history is the same across both searches; he changes the emphasis and selected projects for each opportunity. Cedarline's Backend Engineer listing, CL-47, needs database migration experience. His platform version instead emphasizes build tooling. These are different presentations of the same employment facts.
His starting problem is inconsistent dates. A correction to one previous role has to reach the factual record used by both resume versions. He also wants to retain closed opportunities because a contact may refer to an earlier conversation. Removing 32 records to meet a free limit would make his history less useful.
Using the matrix, Omar chooses Teal for his primary tracker. Free capacity accommodates his 132 records, and shared work history matches the factual relationship between his resume versions. This is a fit decision based on his requirements, not a claim that Teal is better for every multi-role search.
His completed CL-47 record contains the employer page, requisition, location, saved description, stage, next action and the final filename Omar-Cedarline-CL47.pdf. He records that the platform-focused project is omitted from this version, rather than deleting the project from his underlying history. The next action is to check whether the employer form needs a separate project URL; no application has yet been sent in this teaching example.
The shared-history boundary still requires care. Teal documents connected work history across resumes. Omar therefore distinguishes a correction to a historical fact from a role-specific wording choice. Before a broad change, he checks which versions it affects and reopens the final PDFs he intends to use. Connected storage reduces duplicate facts; it does not make every edit appropriate for every role.
Huntr remains an option if Omar wants its board arrangement enough to pay for capacity. But that would buy a preferred workflow, not solve an unavoidable tracking requirement. Keeping his existing sheet is also viable if it already stores the 132 records and a shared factual resume master. Migration is worthwhile only if the new routine removes a maintenance failure he actually experiences. For Omar, the gain is correcting one factual history while retaining older conversations; that benefit is more concrete than having another dashboard.
Case two: Priya needs separate research tracks
Priya has 44 retained opportunities across quantitative research and product analytics. Her research track follows publication requirements, methods discussions and lab contacts. Her analytics track follows portfolio review, stakeholder interviews and product experiments. Estuary's Research Analyst role, ES-92, belongs in the research track even though its title resembles roles in the other search.
Her difficulty is not record volume. It is that a single list mixes next actions with different meanings. A research contact asking for a writing sample is not the same stage as a product team requesting a portfolio presentation. She wants each track to have a small set of useful stages and a clearly selected base resume.
Applying the same six criteria, Priya chooses Huntr's separate boards. Her 44 records fit the documented free job allowance, and custom lists let the research board reflect its actual steps. She selects a research base for ES-92's packet, keeps the relevant writing-sample note with that role, and preserves a separate analytics base. This describes an authored organization choice; it does not claim that two bases are automatically isolated in every editing interaction.
Her completed ES-92 record names the employer, requisition and research location, stores the source description, links the relevant contact, and identifies the writing sample she would send. Her next action is to review the sample against the employer's requested format. The packet is a convenient container for those materials. It is not evidence that the employer has received them.
The board restriction changes her capture habit. Priya chooses the destination board before saving. If she accidentally puts ES-92 on the analytics board, she checks its notes and materials, recreates the record on research, and verifies the new copy before removing the mistaken one. A later drag between boards is not a documented recovery path. The recreated ES-92 record must retain its employer URL and research note; otherwise the board looks correct while its context is missing.
Teal could still serve Priya if status grouping and notes give her enough separation. The choice turns on whether those views preserve her research context with less upkeep than separate boards. Someone who prefers one chronological history might reasonably make the opposite choice with the same number of jobs.
A completed Friday maintenance pass
A tracker earns its place when a short maintenance session resolves real ambiguity. In Omar's example, Friday begins with CL-47 still marked Applying. He has exported its resume but has not submitted the employer form. He checks the filename, preserves Applying, and writes the outstanding project-URL question as the next action. He then corrects the historical employment date and checks the two affected resume versions.
This matters because Teal's export guide describes an optional setting that moves the connected job to Applied when a resume is exported. Omar uses status to mean an employer submission, so he avoids relying on that export-triggered update. A downloaded PDF and an employer acknowledgment are different events. If he later submits, he records that event separately.
Priya's Friday pass begins with a misplaced ES-92 record. She copies its source URL, description and contact note into the intended research record, checks the selected materials, then resolves the duplicate. She does not delete the original first and hope the packet survives. Huntr's packet documentation says deleting a job also deletes its packet; deleting only a packet leaves the job. That relationship makes the recovery order consequential.
She also leaves the job short of Submitted until the actual employer action occurs. Huntr's tracker submission control updates organization state. Opening an application destination or downloading files cannot establish employer receipt. Both candidates finish their maintenance pass with a known record, a named document and a specific next action, rather than a cleaner-looking board with uncertain history.
Export enough to leave safely
Portability has two parts: the opportunity history and the documents used for it. Omar exports a tracker report and keeps the final CL-47 PDF in his own folder. Teal currently documents PDF resume export; selecting resume and cover letter together produces one PDF. If an employer needs separate files, he exports them individually. A report export is not an editable resume archive.
Priya uses Huntr's Download My Data workflow to obtain its ZIP of typed CSV data. She opens the relevant files, finds ES-92 and checks whether its stage and note are represented. She independently preserves the writing sample and final resume. The public guide does not establish a complete attachment round trip into another tracker, so she does not assume one.
Their completed backup inventory is modest: one record export, a folder of final submitted or intended files, and a short note explaining their stage meanings. If a migration is necessary, they test one role's identity, notes and document association in the destination before moving the whole search. That sample answers a practical question: will the new system retain what they need to reconstruct a conversation?
Pay for a requirement you can name
Current public pricing lists Teal+ at $13 for seven days, $29 for 30 days and $79 for 90 days. Teal's free tier advertises unlimited tracking and resumes; paid writing and analysis features are separate from tracking volume. Its pricing and help pages differ on some free writing-credit details, so an exact AI allowance should be confirmed in the account rather than used to choose a tracker.
Huntr's public pricing lists Pro at $40 monthly, $90 every three months and $160 every six months. Free tracking lists 100 jobs and up to 100 document uploads. The plan separately lists two job-tailored resumes and two application packets; those allowances do not expand with the job count. Priya's single ES-92 packet fits that stated packet allowance. A filtered or archived view should not be assumed to create additional allowance; the current documentation does not settle that mechanism. These are public plan descriptions, not an account-side capacity test. Someone near the cap should verify it before relying on a cleanup plan.
For Omar, capacity and shared facts settle the choice without buying writing tools. For Priya, separate research stages justify Huntr while her record count fits. Neither needs to switch merely because the other product has a longer feature list. Before paying, identify the blocked task, the billing period and what remains accessible after cancellation. Keep a current export and your own final-document folder so changing tools does not require reconstructing an application from memory.
Use the same six tasks to evaluate your own search: capture, stages, context, resume facts, export and retained volume. Choose the routine whose errors you can detect and repair. After the first week, check one captured role, one status change and one exported record; if any loses important context, revise the routine before adding more jobs. If the existing system does that, keep it. When you need new opportunities to add, browse jobs posted within the last 24 hours and preserve the employer's role identity in your chosen tracker.