HireForge
AI hiring-fit scores for IT, finance & science
I built HireForge (https://hireforge.ithubs.org) after watching friends rewrite resumes for every posting without knowing which gaps actually mattered.
What it does
1. Upload resume (PDF)
2. Paste a job URL (or description)
3. Get a hiring-fit score with a factor breakdown — skills/tools overlap, evidence depth, role-relevant gaps
Positioning: estimate + checklist, not an offer guarantee.
Who it's for
Knowledge workers in competitive tracks: IT / software / data, finance / fintech / FP&A, and science / biotech / research.
What's free
No-account score: https://hireforge.ithubs.org/score
Organic content
Blog with vertical guides: https://hireforge.ithubs.org/blog
Ask
If you're hiring or job-hunting in these ICPs, try a score on a real posting and tell me where the breakdown is wrong or unclear — that feedback ships next.
Happy to answer architecture / go-to-market questions in the thread.
2 Comments
@Aryan Sinh great question — and yes, that observation is exactly why HireForge leads with fit before rewrite. What I kept seeing: people spent hours polishing a resume for a posting they were already a stretch for (missing stack, seniority, or credentials the JD actually screens on). Optimization without a posting-specific checklist often just makes a weak match look prettier. So the sequence I’m betting on is: (1) score against the real JD so the gaps are explicit, (2) decide whether to apply / upskill / find a better-fit role, (3) only then tailor the resume to evidenced strengths — without inventing experience. Curious if that matches what you’ve seen on the seeking side, or if you’d flip the order.
I'm curious what convinced you job seekers benefit more from a hiring-fit estimate than from resume optimization itself.
Was there something you observed that suggested people first need confidence they're targeting the right roles before they start rewriting their resumes?