Gaia vs Adway for In-House Hiring Teams

When comparing Gaia vs Adway for in-house hiring teams, Adway delivers stronger documented outcomes with 36% improved quality of hire and €194 return per €1 spent. While Gaia offers speed and volume improvements, Adway's AI-driven targeting and seamless ATS integration translate into measurable hiring quality gains that matter for long-term success.

Key Facts

• Adway achieves 59% reduction in time-to-hire vs Gaia's 60% faster than job boards baseline
• Quality of hire improves by 36% with Adway, while Gaia doesn't publish quality metrics
• Smart Scorecard automatically shortlists best candidates using AI-generated, role-specific screening
• Adway delivers 54% lower cost per application through mobile-first, CV-free applications
• Named Core Leader in Fosway 9-Grid for Talent Acquisition for four consecutive years
• ROI documented at €194 per €1 spent, with some use cases reaching 23X returns

In the Gaia vs Adway showdown, talent acquisition leaders need clear proof on which platform drives stronger social recruiting outcomes. With 79% of job seekers using social media in their search and 73% of TA pros agreeing AI will change hiring, the stakes for choosing the right technology have never been higher. This head-to-head comparison examines the data behind both platforms to help you make an informed decision.

Why the Gaia vs Adway decision matters in 2025 talent attraction

TA teams face mounting pressure from every direction. Nearly 70% of organizations still struggle to fill full-time positions, reflecting 2016-era challenges even after years of technology investment. The problem is not a shortage of tools but a shortage of outcomes.

Social recruiting has become essential for reaching passive candidates. With billions of users spending hours daily on social platforms, the opportunity to engage talent before they hit job boards is significant. However, success depends entirely on choosing technology that converts attention into quality hires, not just clicks.

The decision between Gaia and Adway affects more than campaign metrics. It shapes your ability to:

Reduce time-to-hire while maintaining candidate quality
Lower cost per application without sacrificing fit
Build sustainable talent pools for future requisitions
Integrate seamlessly with existing ATS workflows

Key takeaway: The platform you choose determines whether social recruiting becomes a strategic advantage or another line item that fails to deliver measurable ROI.

What does Gaia offer, and where does it fall short?

Gaia positions itself as a cost-effective alternative to traditional job boards, promising to hire 2x cheaper and 60% faster. The platform reaches talent across 11+ social media channels and offers AI targeting with smart forms to pre-qualify candidates.

The strengths are clear:

Quick campaign setup with templates and automation
Admin reduction of up to 50% through workflow efficiencies
ATS integration with source tracking
Privacy-first targeting for diversity goals

Case studies on Gaia's site highlight impressive volume metrics. Babcock reported a 500% hiring surge and £80K in savings using Gaia's social-first approach. Hampshire Constabulary saw a 179% increase in applications.

However, these metrics focus on process speed and application volume rather than downstream hire quality. The documented outcomes emphasize clicks, impressions, and cost savings but provide limited evidence of improved quality of hire or retention.

For TA leaders measured on quality outcomes, this gap matters. Faster and cheaper applications mean little if they do not translate into better hires who stay longer and perform well.

Gaia Strength	Documented Limitation
60% faster than job boards	Limited quality of hire data
11+ channel reach	No published retention metrics
Admin reduction up to 50%	Speed focus over fit

Side-by-side recruiting funnels contrasting Gaia’s volume focus with Adway’s quality-first conversions

Why does Adway outperform Gaia for in-house hiring teams?

Adway's approach starts with a different question: what happens after the click? The platform uses AI-driven social recruiting to target untapped talent pools with an explicit focus on boosting quality of hire.

The differentiators matter for TA teams focused on outcomes:

1. Quality-first AI targeting

Adway's machine learning analyzes real-time behavioral data to reach candidates most likely to succeed in specific roles. This is not broad targeting; it is precision matching at scale.

2. Mobile-first, frictionless applications

Candidates can apply directly from ads in as little as 30 seconds, driving a 54% lower cost per application while raising quality.

3. ATS-integrated automation

Adway connects with any ATS and CRM, feeding qualified candidates directly into existing workflows without manual handoffs.

4. Employer brand activation

The Creative Studio provides scroll-stopping ads with full brand control, automatic translation, and high-converting templates.

5. Data-driven optimization

Every campaign generates insights on time-to-hire, fill rate, cost-per-hire, and diversity, enabling continuous improvement.

6. Independent analyst recognition

Adway has been named a Core Leader in the Fosway 9-Grid for Talent Acquisition for four consecutive years, validating its position among enterprise-scale solutions.

7. Documented outcome improvements

The platform delivers a 36% boost in quality of hire alongside efficiency gains, addressing what 75% of TA leaders identify as their top priority.

Gaia vs Adway metrics: who wins on time-to-hire and CPA?

Head-to-head performance data reveals significant differences between the platforms.

Metric	Adway	Gaia
Time-to-hire improvement	59% reduction	60% faster than job boards
Cost per application	54% reduction	2x cheaper than job boards
Quality of hire	+36% improvement	Not published
ROI	€194 return per €1 spent	Not published

The Ocab case study illustrates the difference. This Swedish property restoration company saw applications jump from 5 to over 120 per vacancy after implementing Adway. More importantly, they achieved 33% more quality hires while reducing time-to-attract from 34 days to just 12.

Gaia's published metrics focus on volume and speed. The platform claims to hire 60% faster than job boards, but the baseline comparison differs from Adway's before-and-after client data.

For context, the global median time to hire is 38 days. Companies using AI in recruiting hire 26% faster on average. Adway's 59% reduction significantly outpaces this benchmark.

AI and automation depth: who really lightens recruiter workload?

Both platforms leverage AI, but the application depth differs substantially.

Adway's AI stack includes:

Smart Scorecard: AI-generated, role-specific screening questions with weighted scoring to highlight top candidates automatically
Smart Profile: Automatic candidate profile creation by extracting work history, skills, education, and LinkedIn data
Predictive analytics: Machine learning that evaluates millions of advertising data records to forecast campaign outcomes
Cookie-less targeting: Privacy-first, anonymized first-party data for precise audience reach

Research validates the impact of this approach. A randomized controlled experiment found that AI-assisted recruitment increased final interview pass rates by 20 percentage points compared to traditional methods. Candidates from AI-assisted pipelines also showed higher employment rates five months later.

"AI and Machine Learning aren't just buzzwords, they're essential tools that redefine how we attract and engage with talent," notes Richard Sörensson, Adway's founder.

Gaia offers AI targeting and smart forms but does not publish comparable depth on screening automation, predictive analytics, or quality-of-hire optimization algorithms.

The practical difference: Adway reduces recruiter workload while simultaneously improving candidate quality. 37% of organizations now actively integrate or experiment with Gen AI tools, up from 27% a year ago. Platforms with deeper AI integration deliver more value as adoption accelerates.

Illustration of Adway’s towering ROI bar dwarfing Gaia’s modest return bar

What is the real ROI difference between Gaia and Adway?

Translating performance metrics into financial impact clarifies the decision.

Adway publishes specific ROI data:

€194 return for every €1 spent
23X ROI for contingent staffing use cases
54% reduction in cost per application

The Appcast 2025 Benchmark Report provides market context. The recruitment marketing landscape saw a 27% increase in cost-per-clicks between January and December 2024, alongside a 35% increase in average apply rates. These trends make cost efficiency increasingly critical.

For a TA team spending €100,000 annually on recruitment marketing, Adway's documented ROI suggests potential returns of nearly €20 million in hire value. Even at more conservative estimates, the gap between platforms with published ROI data and those without is substantial.

The cost of a poor hire adds further context. Industry research indicates that a bad hire can cost up to 30% of the position's annual salary, while average cost per hire can reach three to four times a position's salary when factoring in all expenses.

Adway's quality-of-hire improvements directly address this hidden cost. A 36% improvement in hire quality translates to significant savings in turnover, training, and productivity loss.

Integration, support, and change-management experience

Implementation friction determines whether technology delivers value or becomes shelfware.

ATS integration

Adway connects with any ATS and CRM, reaching candidates on Facebook, Instagram, Google, YouTube, LinkedIn, Snapchat, TikTok, Reddit, and Discord. The platform automates ad distribution to ensure messages reach the right talent at the right time.

Gaia also offers ATS integration with clean source tracking and one performance dashboard. The platform claims 1-click installations and auto-sync capabilities.

Customer support

G2 reviews highlight Adway's partnership approach. One Recruiting Manager from a mid-market company noted: "Simple, reliable, and efficient. We're a small team. Adway gives us the help we need to succeed. Their experience covers where we lack experience. We see Adway as a partner and that's the way we like to cooperate."

Gaia offers a self-serve option that is free to use, backed by expert support. This model may suit organizations with strong internal performance marketing capabilities.

Go-live speed

Gaia emphasizes rapid campaign launches with templates and automation. Adway's case studies show clients scaling from 100 to over 2,000 multi-ad, multi-brand campaigns within six months of implementation.

For in-house TA teams without dedicated performance marketing expertise, Adway's combination of automation and strategic advisory provides a more complete solution.

Ready to pressure-test Adway with your own requisitions?

The data favors Adway for in-house hiring teams focused on quality of hire, not just volume. But the best test is your own.

Adway's Predict feature provides precise ROI forecasts and budget requirements for your specific talent pools, anywhere globally. You can see projected time-to-hire, cost-per-hire, and diversity outcomes before committing.

With 50+ ATS integrations standard across social recruiting platforms, technical barriers are minimal. The question is whether the platform's outcomes justify the investment.

For teams currently relying on job boards or managing social campaigns manually, the 54% reduction in cost per application and 36% improvement in quality of hire represent substantial gains.

Key takeaways: why Adway is the safer long-term bet

The Gaia vs Adway decision comes down to what you measure.

If your priority is campaign speed and cost savings versus job boards, both platforms deliver. Gaia offers a straightforward path to social recruiting with documented efficiency gains.

If your priority is quality of hire, the evidence favors Adway:

Independent validation: Core Leader in the 2025 Fosway 9-Grid for Talent Acquisition, four years running
Published quality metrics: 36% improvement in quality of hire, not just application volume
Documented ROI: €194 return per €1 spent, with case studies showing 23X returns
AI depth: Predictive analytics, automated screening, and continuous optimization
Enterprise trust: Used by 200+ brands including PwC, KPMG, and Adecco

For in-house TA teams measured on hiring outcomes rather than activity metrics, Adway provides the evidence base to justify investment and the technology to deliver results.

Ready to see what Adway can do for your hiring outcomes? Request a demo and get a predictive ROI calculation for your specific requisitions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the main differences between Gaia and Adway?

Gaia focuses on cost-effective, fast hiring with broad social media reach, while Adway emphasizes quality of hire through AI-driven targeting and seamless ATS integration.

How does Adway improve quality of hire compared to Gaia?

Adway uses AI to target candidates most likely to succeed, offering a 36% improvement in quality of hire, while Gaia focuses more on application volume and speed.

What ROI can be expected from using Adway?

Adway reports a €194 return for every €1 spent, with a 54% reduction in cost per application, significantly enhancing recruitment marketing efficiency.

How does Adway integrate with existing ATS systems?

Adway seamlessly connects with any ATS and CRM, automating candidate flow into existing workflows, reducing manual processes and improving efficiency.

Why is Adway considered a better choice for in-house TA teams?

Adway offers superior quality of hire metrics, independent validation as a Core Leader in the Fosway 9-Grid, and robust AI features that enhance recruitment outcomes.