Time-to-Hire vs Time-to-Fill

The hiring process takes 36 days on average. Most candidates want an answer within two weeks of their interview. That gap costs companies the candidates they actually want.

Two recruiting metrics sit at the centre of this problem: Time to Hire and Time to Fill. They sound similar, measure different things, and both tell you something the other can't. Knowing the difference helps HR leaders and hiring managers find where the process is slowing down and fix it before a strong candidate accepts an offer elsewhere.

What is Time to Hire?

Time to Hire measures the number of days between a candidate submitting their application and accepting a job offer. The average is around 24 days, though it varies by industry.

A slow Time to Hire usually signals friction in the interview process: too many rounds, long gaps between stages, or delayed decisions. Sometimes the candidate is the bottleneck, but that often reflects a process that hasn't given them enough information to say yes quickly.

Why Time to Hire matters

More than three-quarters of applicants see the hiring process as a signal of how a company treats its people. A slow reply doesn't just lose a candidate. It shapes how that person talks about your company afterward.

Tracking Time to Hire tells you exactly where the process stalls so you can move faster without cutting corners. Candidates you don't hire will still remember a prompt, respectful process. Those you do want to hire won't wait indefinitely.

How to calculate Time to Hire

Count the days from the date a candidate applied to the date they accepted the offer. Average across all recent hires.

Time to Hire = Date offer accepted - Date application submitted

Average Time to Hire = Sum of all individual Times to Hire / Number of new hires

Example: A candidate applies May 1 and accepts May 21. Time to Hire is 20 days. A second candidate's Time to Hire is 18 days. Average Time to Hire: (20 + 18) / 2 = 19 days.

What is Time to Fill?

Time to Fill measures the number of days from when a position is approved to when it is filled. Most companies see this metric run upward of 35 days.

Where Time to Hire focuses on the candidate's journey, Time to Fill captures everything that happens before a candidate even applies: internal approvals, job posting, sourcing, and screening. It reflects how well the organization itself is set up to hire.

Time to Fill surfaces answers to questions like:

• How long do internal approvals take? Delays between management sign-off and HR action add days before the search even begins.
• Which sourcing channels work fastest? Some pipelines deliver qualified candidates in days; others take weeks.
• Where do bottlenecks sit? Posting delays, slow screening, or scheduling gaps all show up here.

Why Time to Fill matters

Time to Fill is an important HR metric for understanding the real cost of an open role. An empty desk isn't just an inconvenience. It's lost output, added pressure on the rest of the team, and a cost that compounds every week the role stays unfilled.

If your average Time to Fill is 39 days and a key employee gives two weeks' notice, you're looking at nearly a month of coverage gaps. Knowing that number in advance lets you build policies, like longer notice periods or standing talent pipelines, that reduce the damage.

How to calculate Time to Fill

Count the days from the date the position was approved to the date the offer was accepted.

Time to Fill = Date offer accepted - Date position approved

Average Time to Fill = Sum of all individual Times to Fill / Number of new hires

Example: A position is approved April 1. Due to a missed email, HR doesn't begin posting until April 20. The candidate accepts May 21. Time to Fill: 50 days. That two-week internal delay is visible in the number and fixable once you see it.

You can also use SHRM's Time to Fill calculation spreadsheet to track this across multiple hires.

Time to Hire vs Time to Fill: key differences

Both metrics matter. Neither tells the whole story alone.

	Time to Hire	Time to Fill
What it measures	Candidate experience from application to offer accepted	Organizational process from position approved to offer accepted
Starts when	Candidate submits application	Position is approved internally
Ends when	Candidate accepts offer	Candidate accepts offer
Reveals	Friction in interviews and decisions	Bottlenecks in sourcing, approvals, and posting
Average benchmark	~24 days	~35+ days

The difference between the two numbers is the time your organization spent before a candidate was even in the picture. If Time to Fill is 50 days and Time to Hire is 20, your internal process consumed 30 days before the first application came in.

How to use these metrics to improve hiring

Tracking Time to Hire and Time to Fill turns a vague sense that "hiring takes too long" into specific, fixable problems. Here's where to focus:

1. Invest in recruiting technology. If your team is manually sorting applications, posting to job boards one at a time, or scheduling interviews by email, you're adding days to both metrics before the process really starts. Recruiting software that automates posting, filters applications, and keeps candidates moving through stages removes friction without removing rigour.

2. Fix communication gaps. Many delays aren't about the candidate. They're about an email that sat unread, a hiring manager who didn't get a calendar invite, or an offer letter that took three days to draft. Time to Fill exposes these gaps clearly. Once you see where communication breaks down, you can build the process so those gaps don't recur.

3. Simplify the process where you can. Not every step in a hiring process adds value. Extra interview rounds, redundant approvals, or slow background checks can all push metrics up without improving the quality of the hire. Use the data to identify and remove those bottlenecks.

Tracking these metrics in a dashboard keeps the numbers visible to the people who can act on them. When a hiring manager can see that their open role has been in process for 40 days, that visibility creates accountability. Waiting for a monthly report means the problem is already three weeks old before anyone knows it exists.

Tracking Time to Hire and Time to Fill

Knowing your numbers is the starting point. Acting on them is what changes outcomes.

Both Time to Hire and Time to Fill belong on any HR dashboard alongside the other metrics that reflect how your team operates. When leaders can see these numbers in real time, without waiting for someone to pull a report or paste figures into a spreadsheet, they can make faster decisions and keep hiring moving.

Klips connects to your HR and recruiting tools and keeps these metrics current, so your team always knows where things stand.