If your agency still relies on manual CV formatting, you know the pain: time wasted cleaning layouts, stripping photos, and anonymising details. Distill automates these steps, but manual formatting remains the fallback for many. This guide compares manual CV formatting workflows with Distill's automated approach, helping agency owners and ops managers decide which fits their needs — or how to combine both efficiently.
TL;DR comparison table
| Aspect | Manual CV Formatting | Distill |
|---|---|---|
| Core function | Human-led CV cleanup, formatting, anonymising | Automated CV formatting and anonymisation via email intake |
| Speed | Minutes per CV, scales poorly | Seconds per CV, handles bulk automatically |
| Consistency | Inconsistent; depends on formatter skill | Consistent formatting meeting ATS specs |
| Anonymisation | Manual and error-prone | Automated, strips name, email, phone, photo, graduation year |
| Scalability | Limited by team size and workload | Unlimited seats, no per-CV limits |
| Pricing | Staff time cost; often hidden overhead | Transparent subscription; no surprise fees |
| Integration | Requires manual upload to ATS | Email-based; outputs ATS-ready Word docs |
| Compliance risk | Higher risk from human error | Lower risk; standardised anonymisation |
| Ideal for | Small volumes, ad-hoc fixes | High volumes, compliance-focused agencies |
What manual CV formatting actually does
Manual CV formatting is the traditional approach your team likely uses today. It involves a human opening each CV file, tidying the layout, fixing font issues, removing tables or columns that break ATS parsing, and anonymising personal details by hand. This process often includes:
- Reformatting inconsistent fonts, spacing, and margins
- Removing photos or logos that ATS reject
- Deleting or masking names, emails, and phone numbers for blind hiring
- Converting PDFs or complex Word docs into simple ATS-friendly formats
- Manually checking for GDPR compliance on data retention
While manual formatting allows fine control, it's slow and error-prone. Formatting quality varies by who's doing it and how busy they are. It's tough to maintain consistency across a team, especially under tight deadlines. And anonymisation is often incomplete or inconsistent, increasing compliance risk.
Manual formatting also demands dedicated staff time, which is costly and scales poorly as CV volume grows. Many agencies fall back on it because their ATS or sourcing tools don't handle formatting well or lack anonymisation features.
What Distill actually does
Distill automates CV formatting and anonymisation, stripping out personal details and producing ATS-ready Word documents. It's designed as an email-first tool: you forward CVs into a Distill inbox, and it returns clean, formatted files instantly. Here's how it works:
- Strips name, email, phone number, photo, and graduation year automatically
- Reorganises layout to remove ATS-breaking tables, columns, and complex formatting
- Produces consistent Word documents that upload cleanly into Bullhorn, Vincere, or other ATS
- Retains zero copies of CVs, reducing data retention risk
- Offers unlimited seats and unlimited CVs under a straightforward subscription
Distill does one thing well — the formatting and anonymisation layer that most ATS and sourcing tools don't handle. It's not a sourcing or screening platform but fits neatly alongside those tools.
Feature-by-feature comparison
| Feature | Manual CV Formatting | Distill |
|---|---|---|
| Formatting quality | Variable; depends on human skill and time | Consistent, ATS-compliant output |
| Anonymisation | Manual, prone to oversight | Automated, standardised, GDPR-friendly |
| Speed | Slow; minutes per CV, bottleneck in workflow | Fast; seconds per CV, handles bulk easily |
| Data retention | CVs stored on local drives or email inboxes | Zero retention after processing |
| User access | Limited by number of trained staff | Unlimited seats for all team members |
| Integration | Manual upload to ATS after formatting | Email inbox intake, outputs Word documents |
| Scalability | Poor; grows costly with volume | Good; flat pricing, no per-CV limit |
| Error rate | Higher risk of missed anonymisation or formatting errors | Low error rate due to automation |
| Compliance risk | Higher, especially for blind hiring | Lower, supports compliance efforts |
| Training and onboarding | Time-consuming; requires skilled formatters | Minimal; email forwarding familiar to all |
| Cost | Staff salaries and overhead | Transparent subscription; no hidden costs |
Pricing breakdown
Manual CV formatting costs are mostly hidden in staff time and overhead. Agencies need trained formatters, who spend hours a week on CV cleanup. These costs scale linearly with CV volume and are hard to budget precisely. You may also pay for additional software like Word licences or PDF editors.
Distill offers clear subscription pricing with no per-CV fees and unlimited users. See Distill pricing for current rates. This predictability helps agencies budget and scale without surprise costs.
If your agency sends dozens or hundreds of CVs weekly, manual formatting staff costs quickly exceed Distill's subscription. For smaller volumes, manual formatting may still be cost-effective.
Which agency type fits which tool
Manual CV formatting often suits:
- Small agencies with low CV volumes
- Teams with existing formatting expertise
- Situations requiring bespoke formatting tweaks not possible automatically
- Agencies not processing blind hiring or sensitive anonymisation needs
Distill fits better when:
- Your agency submits 20+ CVs per week regularly
- You must comply with GDPR and blind hiring requirements
- You want to reduce human error on formatting and anonymisation
- You prefer predictable costs and scaling without hiring more staff
- Your ATS or sourcing tools lack strong formatting support
Many agencies use both tools: Distill for bulk, repeatable formatting and anonymisation, and manual formatting for edge cases or complex CVs needing human attention.
Migrating from manual CV formatting to Distill (or running both)
Switching from manual formatting to Distill is straightforward because Distill works over email. Simply forward CVs to your Distill inbox, and the clean file returns automatically. This requires minimal change to your existing workflow.
For agencies running both:
- Use Distill for the majority of CVs to save time and ensure compliance
- Reserve manual formatting for CVs with unusual layouts or client-specific formatting requests
- Train your ops team to spot when manual intervention is needed post-Distill processing
- Monitor the workflow regularly to catch any edge cases that automation misses
This hybrid approach balances efficiency with flexibility.
FAQ
Can Distill handle CVs in PDF format? Yes. Distill accepts PDFs and Word documents and outputs ATS-friendly Word files.
Does Distill store CVs after processing? No. Distill deletes CVs immediately after processing to reduce compliance risk.
Is manual formatting ever better than Distill? In rare cases requiring highly customised formatting, manual work may be necessary. But these cases are exceptions.
Can Distill anonymise CVs for blind hiring? Yes. It automatically strips names, emails, phone numbers, photos, and graduation years.
How do I integrate Distill with my ATS? Distill outputs ATS-ready Word documents sent back by email. You upload these manually or via your ATS's standard import.
What if a CV has complex tables or columns? Distill removes or reformats ATS-breaking elements automatically. Manual formatting handles more complex fixes if needed.
If you're sending 20+ CVs per week to clients or need consistent anonymisation for blind hiring, Distill takes the formatting and compliance burden off your team. Try Distill free and see how email-based automated formatting fits alongside your existing workflows.