The IT market remains competitive, and the number of responses per vacancy is high. In large companies, recruiters review hundreds of CVs every day. And the first decision is often made in a few seconds. dev.ua asked representatives of leading IT employers in Ukraine: which CVs they automatically filter out and which are real red flags.
The most common reason for rejection is banal: the candidate is not suitable for the position.
«We automatically filter out resumes that don’t match the vacancy at all. When a 3D Artist applies for a developer position, it doesn’t look like „what if“, but like „I just clicked Apply everywhere“,» says Svitlana Maidan, HRD Pingle Studio.
A similar position is voiced at PlantIn. According to Natalia Mudrak, Talent Acquisition Lead, if a developer responds to an HR manager or a candidate applies for all possible positions, regardless of direction, this is actually an immediate rejection.
EVO also pays attention to basic role matching.
«We don’t expect a 100% match, but if the experience and skills don’t cover at least 50% of the basic requirements, the algorithm or the recruiter will say „no“,» explains Olena Oleksienko, Chief People Team at EVO.
Daryna Kuzmyk, Talent & Culture Lead, Railsware, says that the company has basic criteria that work as a simple and objective filter right from the start. «For example, location: in some countries we cannot work for legal or compliance reasons. Equally important is the level of English — if it is lower than required for the role, it immediately complicates work in international teams. Another factor is expectations regarding remuneration, which can significantly exceed the budget of a specific position,» she says.
Levi9 notes: if the experience does not match the level of the position or the resume looks like a mass mailing without adaptation to the role, this is a signal that the candidate has not analyzed the requirements.
SoftServe confirms: recruiters primarily assess the match between the candidate’s experience, project requirements, and client context. The same experience may be valuable in one case and irrelevant in another. If the profile is strong but not suitable for a specific role, the candidate may be offered alternative vacancies.
A separate trend of the last year is resumes generated by artificial intelligence.
«Fake or scam profiles generated by AI can be a red flag. The number of such profiles on LinkedIn has increased significantly, especially among candidates in Data Science, MLE, and AI,» notes Olga Makarova, manager of the talent search department at EPAM Ukraine.
Intetics Talent Acquisition Team notes that the main red flag today is fake resumes, which have become noticeably more common on the market with the development of AI. «Usually these are resumes completely copied from the job description, or obvious templates that are massively used by such candidates. We also often encounter candidates who apply for completely different jobs with a completely reworked resume and work experience in accordance with the job description,» the company comments.
EVO confirms: if a CV looks like a template text without lively formulations and specific achievements, it’s a minus.
«If a candidate is unable to describe their own experience and achievements in their own words, questions arise about their real skills,» says Oleksienko.
Another factor that significantly influences the decision is frequent changes in jobs.
«Frequent transitions of 3–6 months without explanation may indicate difficulties with adaptation or expectations. It is important for us to understand the context,» EVO explains.
EPAM also notes that candidates who change jobs too often are often eliminated.
Ciklum pays attention to pronounced job hopping or profiles with purely freelance experience.
«Based on such profiles, it is difficult to assess how stably a candidate will be able to work in a team,» says Angelina Kot, head of the sourcing function at Ciklum.
According to Daryna Kuzmyk from Railsware, we consider everything related to career breaks, changes in direction, or atypical experience in context and do not consider it an automatic reason for rejection.
On average, a recruiter spends 6–8 seconds on the first look at a CV, says Olena Oleksienko from EVO. «If a candidate’s CV is a quest that is difficult to complete, then we are most likely not going to arrange an interview,» she explains.
Among the typical problems:
lack of structure;
a «canvas» of text without headings;
different fonts and colors;
grammatical errors;
lack of work dates;
broken links;
excessive volume (3+ pages).
Ciklum adds: «An excessive document often hides key experience among irrelevant information. They also warn against resumes without a clear professional focus, with a large number of photos, or a list of courses that are not directly related to the role.»
Recruiters are wary of abstract wording.
«'An ambitious specialist striving for success' is not a samariya. It’s better to be without it altogether than general phrases,» EVO notes.
The same question arises about «80% knowledge of English.» Companies advise using generally accepted levels: A1–C2 or basic/intermediate/advanced.
Strange or inappropriate photos are another red flag.
«A selfie from vacation, a photo with someone’s shoulder cut off, or a photo in the dark — that’s not the way to go. A high-quality portrait or no photo at all is better,» EVO says.
PlantIn also notes: a CV in Russian or professional ties to the aggressor country are a factor in rejection.
Pingle Studio emphasizes a principled position: the company does not consider candidates from Russia and Belarus, regardless of experience.
Levi9 draws attention to another problem — the lack of transparency of experience. Resumes without months of work, with frequent transitions without explanation, long breaks, or without a description of specific projects are often filtered out. In a large flow, there is simply no resource to clarify details.
SoftServe also emphasizes: the clearer and more specific the skills, roles, and achievements are described, the easier it is to find a relevant match.
There are also simple but fundamental factors.
For Levi9 it is:
lack of important information (for example, the level of English for international teams);
spelling errors;
chaotic design;
non-clickable links;
obviously AI-generated text without logic.
SoftServe adds another basic criterion — location and the possibility of official cooperation (in particular for the Ukrainian office). As well as current contact details: without them, even a strong candidate cannot be invited to a dialogue.
Recruiters separately emphasize: there are things that candidates often perceive as «minuses,» but in reality they are not.
Insufficient level of certain skills. EPAM clarifies: the lack of certain technical skills or an insufficient level of English is not a red flag in itself. «It is rather a blocker for a specific position where these requirements are critical,» explains Olga Makarova. She explains: if the position requires, for example, C1 in English or deep expertise in Python, then the absence of this is not a sign of a «bad» candidate, but simply a failure to meet the requirements.
Career breaks are not a problem in themselves. Maternity leave, relocation, volunteering, service in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, training, or changing professions are all normal life stages. Context and transparency are important.
Changing professional direction is also not an automatic rejection. If the candidate explains the logic of the transition (for example, from QA to business analysis or from development to product), this rather indicates awareness.
The lack of a 100% match with the vacancy is not critical. Most companies expect to cover key requirements, not a complete match down to the last point.
Conciseness is not a problem. A summary can be short as long as it is structured and contains clear results.
In the end, recruiters agree on one thing: a red flag is not «imperfect» but a signal of inattention, insincerity, or lack of relevance. Everything else is a matter of dialogue.
Since a resume is a candidate’s product, it should be:
relevant vacancies,
structured,
specific,
without unnecessary noise,
with clearly described achievements.
After all, at a time when dozens or hundreds of people can apply for one position, it is the first 6–8 seconds that decide whether the next step will be an interview.
