Resume Statistics (2026): What 800 Real Resumes Show

Most resume statistics circulating online are unsourced — numbers passed between listicles until nobody remembers where they came from. This page is different by construction: every figure below comes from one original dataset we built and published — 800 real resumes, 14,669 lines, 300 of them scored end-to-end by a production ATS engine — with the full methodology open in the resume verbs study. Cite freely, with attribution; that's what this page is for.

The headline numbers

• 2.3% of all resume lines contain a concrete impact figure — a percentage, dollar amount, headcount, or multiplier. The other 97.7% of lines make claims without measurable proof.
• 52 out of 100 was the mean score when a production ATS engine evaluated 300 of the resumes (median 56).
• Zero resumes out of 300 scored 80 or above. 31 scored below 40, and 227 — three-quarters of the sample — landed in the unremarkable 40–59 band.
• ~4 points: the average scoring advantage of resumes containing at least one concrete figure (54.9 vs. 50.9). One real number, measurable difference.
• 45.4% of resumes use the word "developed" — the most saturated verb in the corpus, appearing 999 times across 800 documents.

Word-choice statistics

• The five most common resume verbs — developed (45.4%), worked (43.0%), created (38.0%), performed (37.1%), and provided (37.1%) — all describe activity rather than outcomes.
• Result verbs are rare: increased appears on 17.1% of resumes, improved on 12.2%, reduced on just 7.4%.
• The rarest verbs in the corpus are result-shaped: pioneered and influenced each appear on 0.5% of resumes, grew and cultivated on 0.8%, launched, drove, and expanded on 1.6%.

Evidence statistics: which claims come with proof

Share of each verb's lines carrying a hard figure:

• Reduced: 62.5%
• Achieved: 46.7%
• Improved: 42.9%
• Initiated: 41.2%
• Developed: 18.3%
• Completed: 15.2%
• Worked: 14.2%
• Handled: 13.6%
• Demonstrated: 7.1%

The pattern: verbs that name a result carry proof roughly 4× as often as verbs that name activity. Writers who commit to an outcome verb tend to finish the thought with a number; writers using task verbs rarely do.

ATS scoring statistics

From the 300-resume scoring run against a production applicant tracking engine:

• Weakest scoring dimension across the sample: proving achievements with numbers — 32.3/100 on average.
• Strongest dimension: keywords — 70.7/100. Job seekers have learned the keyword lesson; the evidence lesson hasn't landed.
• An ATS, for the record, is a searchable database recruiters query — not a robot that auto-rejects resumes. The scores above measure how well a resume communicates when parsed, not a pass/fail gate. (More on how this actually works: our ATS checker guide.)

What the numbers mean for your resume

The data supports exactly one priority: close the proof gap before touching anything else. With 97.7% of lines unproven and evidence the weakest-scoring dimension by 38 points, one true number added to your strongest bullet is statistically worth more than any amount of verb polishing, formatting, or buzzword removal — though the full verb guides help you frame that number once you have it.

You can see where your own resume stands in about a minute: the free ATS checker runs the same class of evaluation this study used, across 8 dimensions, no signup required.

About this data

Collected and analyzed in 2026 from 800 publicly available real resumes (14,669 parsed lines); 300 randomly-sampled documents were scored by a production ATS engine across 8 dimensions. Two dimensions (contact information and formatting) are excluded from all claims here because the public datasets strip personal details and flatten layout. Full tables, statistical caveats, and limitations: the resume verbs study. If you reference these figures, please link the study as the source.