PDF or Word? Do tables really break parsing? Can two columns get you rejected? Straight answers to the 10 ATS questions we hear most.
We get asked ATS questions every single day at jd2cv.uk. Most of the advice online is either vague ("just optimise your CV!") or contradictory. So we pulled the 10 questions that land in our inbox most often and answered them straight, based on what we actually see when CVs run through real parsing systems. No hedging. No "it depends" non-answers.
Does PDF or Word work better with ATS?
Word (.docx) is safer in most cases. The honest reason is that PDFs can be either text-based or image-based depending on how they were exported, and ATS software does not always distinguish reliably. A Word file gives the parser a clean structured document to read without that ambiguity. That said, most modern ATS platforms handle properly exported PDFs fine. The problem is you rarely know which ATS the employer is using or how old their version is. If you are applying through a job portal and you have a choice, submit Word. If the employer asks for PDF specifically, use PDF. When in doubt, Word wins. We cover this and a dozen other formatting rules in our ATS resume checklist.
Do columns and tables break ATS?
Yes, regularly. Two-column layouts are one of the most common reasons a CV parses badly. The ATS reads left to right, row by row, so a two-column layout often gets read as one long scrambled line rather than two separate sections. Tables have the same problem. Skills listed in a table grid frequently get dropped entirely, or pulled into the wrong section. We see this constantly. The safest structure is a single-column layout with clear section headings. If you want a clean visual design that still passes parsing, our ATS-safe templates are built specifically for that. You do not have to choose between looking good and parsing correctly.
Does font choice matter for ATS?
Not much, but it is not completely irrelevant. Standard fonts like Calibri, Arial, Georgia, and Times New Roman parse without issues on every system. The risk with obscure or decorative fonts is not that the ATS rejects you on sight. It is that the font renders incorrectly on the recruiter's screen after the ATS processes the document, making your CV look broken when a human opens it. Stick to system fonts. Size matters more than most people think: anything below 10pt risks being skipped in some parsers. Use 11pt or 12pt for body text. Use 14pt or 16pt for your name. Clean, readable, boring font choices are the right call here.
Can I use icons for contact info?
No. Icons are images, and images are invisible to ATS parsers. If your email address is next to an envelope icon and the parser cannot read the icon, it sometimes fails to read the text next to it either, depending on the layout. We have seen CVs where the phone number and email were completely missing from the parsed output because they were embedded in an icon-heavy header. Write your contact details as plain text. No envelope. No phone handset. No LinkedIn bird logo. Just the text. It takes five seconds to remove them and it eliminates a real failure point.
Does a photo hurt my CV in the UK?
In the UK, a photo is almost always the wrong call. The legal reason is that photos create grounds for unconscious bias claims, so most UK employers actively do not want them. The ATS reason is that a photo in the header takes up layout space that often breaks parsing for the text immediately around it. UK hiring norms strongly favour no photo, and ATS parsing favours no photo. There is no upside. Leave it out. If you are applying to roles in continental Europe where photos are sometimes expected, check country-specific norms before deciding either way.
How many keywords is too many?
There is no fixed number, but keyword stuffing is identifiable by feel and by behaviour. If you are repeating the same phrase four or five times in slightly different forms just to hit a match score, that is too many. The right approach is to use the keywords that genuinely reflect your experience, placed in the context of real achievements. One strong, specific sentence beats three thin repetitions. We recommend running your CV through our ATS Score Checker to see which keywords are missing versus which are already present, then adding only what is accurate. Stuffing does not improve your score meaningfully, and when a recruiter reads the CV after the ATS, it reads as hollow.
Does the ATS read my cover letter?
Sometimes, but you should not rely on it. Many ATS platforms have a separate field for cover letters that does not connect to the keyword scoring engine. The score the recruiter sees is almost always based on your CV alone. Some systems do parse cover letters, but the weight given to them is minimal and inconsistent. Do not save your key qualifications for the cover letter on the assumption that the ATS will pick them up. Everything that needs to match the job description should be in the CV body. Use the cover letter for context, personality, and explaining things the CV cannot, not for keyword coverage.
Can a human override a low ATS score?
Yes, and this happens more than people assume. An ATS score is a filter, not a verdict. Recruiters at smaller companies often look at CVs that fall just below a threshold, especially when the volume of applications is manageable. At large employers processing thousands of applications, the human review often does not happen until the ATS has already cut the pool significantly. The practical implication is that a strong CV still needs to pass the ATS first at most companies. Getting your score into a reasonable range is not optional if you are applying at scale. But a number on a dashboard does not automatically end your application.
Do all ATS systems work the same way?
No, and this is one of the most misunderstood things about ATS questions in general. Workday, Greenhouse, Lever, iCIMS, Taleo, and SmartRecruiters all parse CVs differently. Some weight skills sections more heavily. Some read dates differently. Some handle PDFs better than others. Some strip formatting entirely; others preserve some structure. This is why advice like "always use a two-column layout" or "always avoid tables" can seem inconsistent depending on where you read it. The safest strategy is to build a CV that parses cleanly across the broadest range of systems, rather than optimising for one. Our ATS-safe templates are tested against multiple parsers for exactly this reason.
Is a match score from one tool the same as another?
No. A 72% on one tool and a 72% on another almost certainly mean different things. Each ATS checker uses its own algorithm to calculate keyword coverage, weighting, and relevance. Some count keyword frequency. Some look at context. Some compare against the full job description; others compare against a subset. Scores are relative to the tool, not to each other or to the actual ATS the employer uses. What matters is the direction of change, not the absolute number. If you add relevant keywords and your score goes up, that is meaningful. If you compare scores across different platforms and treat them as equivalent, you will confuse yourself. Use one consistent tool. We built our ATS Score Checker to give you clear, actionable output rather than a number to stress about.
Still unsure how your CV holds up? Run it through our free ATS Score Checker and see exactly what a parser picks up, what it misses, and what to fix.