The Level Index
Staffing & RecruitingHow does your staffing agency compare?
Gross margin, recruiter productivity, time-to-fill planning, and DSO references for temporary staffing, executive search, and managed services. Bullhorn observations use a global vendor-survey population. Use named source context and separately labeled planning inputs; exact verification status appears beside each reference.
Reviewed October 7, 2026. Published figures retain their own observation periods and populations. Retained source-attributed inputs with no exact capture are explicitly unverified; planning references are not a measured Level industry cohort.
$184B
Market size
U.S. staffing market (2024 SIA) (retained historical reference, exact source not reverified here)
27K+
Firms
U.S. staffing & recruiting firms (retained historical reference, exact source not reverified here)
2.54M
Employment
Temp help jobs (BLS Dec 2024) (retained historical reference, exact source not reverified here)
376%
Turnover
Temp worker turnover, assignment-driven (ASA) (retained historical reference, exact source not reverified here)
Check your own numbers
Use the retained 21-38.5% segment inputs as planning context. Then reconcile your actual bill rate, pay and burden.
The benchmark tells you the range, not your leak. Send us your bill and pay rates, gross margin, and DSO. We will show you where you land by segment, where markup is quietly eroding, and the first fix. Your numbers stay private, we never publish or share client data.
In the free audit, we check:
- •gross margin by segment, client, recruiter, and placement type
- •pay-bill spread versus payroll cycle and client payment terms
- •DSO, factoring cost, and gross profit per recruiter
We use this to prepare your audit before the call. Your numbers stay private.
About the data and its source basisProvenance and method for the staffing & recruiting figures on this page.
About the Data
Named source observations and separately labeled planning references answer different questions. Each verified capture retains its population and date. Previously attributed inputs without an exact retained capture are marked unverified, and do not establish a measured Level industry cohort.
Methodology
Read the evidence class and population beside each metric. A report attribution alone does not verify a value or percentile. Mixed-source table bands and planning inputs are not common quartiles; published percentiles apply only to the captured source population.
The Level CLEAR Framework
Five pillars of staffing & recruiting financial health
Every metric in the Level Index maps to one of five pillars. Together they give you a complete picture of where money is made, lost, stuck, or at risk.
Build a dated weekly payroll and collection bridge. DSO alone does not establish whether a credit facility or factoring is required.
Track eligible orders, submissions, acceptance, placements and gross profit per producer. Vendor survey associations do not establish causal productivity gains.
Separate segment revenue, gross profit, internal cost, operating income and net income. Segment and execution both affect the result.
Model markup and payroll burden on consistent pay/bill denominators. Validate actual wage, tax, benefit and insurance inputs.
Review workers-comp exposure, client concentration, credit risk and reserve estimates. Use actual policy and funding terms.
Owner decision
Separate vendor survey association from an actionable producer economics model.
Bullhorn's 2026 survey links reported growth with time-to-place thresholds in a defined top performer group. That is not proof that adding submissions or AI causes growth. Reconcile eligible orders, acceptance, placements, billed revenue and gross profit before setting productivity targets.
Use a bounded operating test with actual cash and service outcomes.
Source: Named Bullhorn GRID 2026 global survey context and Level operating method
Build a dated payroll-to-collection bridge before choosing finance.
Days Sales Outstanding (DSO)
Source / sample: Retained context: Robert Half FY 2024 10-K + industry guidance. Exact report population/positions are not certified unless a bar is explicitly labeled published below.
The 49-day Robert Half reference was derived from previously attributed FY 2024 AR $772M/revenue $5.8B x 365, not average AR or SMB collection data. Other displayed values are planning cases. DSO alone does not establish a factoring or revolver requirement; model actual payroll, receivables, reserves, collections and available funding.
Source basis
Definition: Eligible billed receivables divided by matching credit revenue times days in the period. The retained Robert Half proxy uses year-end AR and annual revenue; planning cases and actual invoice collection dates are separate measures.
Source: Previously attributed source context (exact values not reverified): Robert Half FY 2024 10-K (AR $772M ÷ Revenue $5.8B × 365)
Use time-to-place observations within the vendor survey population.
Average Time to Place: Bullhorn Subgroup Thresholds and Planning Durations
Source / sample: Bullhorn GRID 2026 global survey; top performers=25%+ 2025 revenue growth; separate planning durations
Bullhorn GRID 2026 surveyed nearly 2,300 professionals globally. Among top performers, defined as 25%+ revenue growth in 2025, 56% reported an average time to place under 10 days and 22% reported average placement times of three days or less. The 3/10 chart values are threshold references; 15/19/35 are independent planning durations, not survey medians or a bottom percentile. The association does not prove faster placement causes growth.
Source basis
Definition: Average time to place as reported by vendor survey respondents. Thresholds are not quantiles and are not directly comparable with independent duration inputs.
Source: Bullhorn GRID 2026 Industry Trends
Model producer contribution from actual gross profit and eligible headcount.
Annual Gross Profit per Producer / Recruiter
Source / sample: Independent annual GP-per-producer planning cases, not measured percentiles
The 150/250/380/500/750K values are retained independent planning cases, not published producer quartiles. Divide comparable gross profit by eligible producer FTE for the same period. Salary, benefits, recruiting tools, managers and overhead must be included before inferring a compensation budget.
Source basis
Definition: Same-period gross profit divided by average eligible producer/recruiter FTE. These are independent annual planning inputs; the unresolved-period recruiter worksheet amounts are not comparable. Chart and table amounts are separate scenarios, not the same central case.
Source: Level producer-contribution planning inputs
Compare segment margins with the same direct-cost accounting.
Gross Margin by Segment (Previously Attributed Sources, Different Populations)
Source / sample: Retained context: Kforce, TrueBlue 10-Ks + Staffing Hub 2024 survey. Exact report population/positions are not certified unless a bar is explicitly labeled published below.
The retained company and segment references use different populations and reporting bases; exact filings are not reverified in this review. Separate temporary labor revenue, payroll burden and fee-only placement economics. Segment mix is one factor alongside contract pricing, utilization and execution.
Source basis
Definition: Same-period revenue less defined direct pay, payroll burden and assignment costs divided by that revenue. Contract staffing and fee-only permanent placement use different denominators; prior source segment figures are not common quartiles.
Source: Previously attributed source context (exact values not reverified): Kforce, TrueBlue; Staffing Hub 2024 survey (exact value/position not reverified)
Gross profit, operating income and net income are different measures.
Kforce FY 2024: gross margin to net margin (% of revenue) (Previously Attributed, Not Reverified)
Source / sample: Retained context: Kforce FY 2024 10-K (SEC EDGAR CIK 930420, results as % of revenue). Exact report population/positions are not certified unless a bar is explicitly labeled published below.
The retained 27/5/3.6% Kforce-attributed references are rounded historical filing context with exact capture unverified here. In an illustration, $10M revenue at 3.6% net is $360,000, while 27% gross is $2.7M before internal operating and other costs. Reconcile definitions and actual SG&A before changing producer targets.
Source basis
Definition: Gross profit, operating income and net income each divided by the same revenue period. Reconcile SG&A, interest, tax and adjustments; previously attributed filing inputs are unverified here.
Source: Previously attributed Kforce FY 2024 filing context; no independent corroboration is asserted
Markup and burdened gross margin use different denominators.
Pay-Rate Markup Planning Scenarios
Source / sample: Independent markup arithmetic assumes 10-14% pay burden. This narrow sensitivity overlaps only the bottom of FICA 7.65% plus the separate workers-comp 4-14% cases (11.65-21.65% before unemployment and benefits); use your actual combined burden.
Markup=(bill-pay)/pay. Unburdened spread=(bill-pay)/bill. In a scenario with 50% markup and burden 10-14% of pay, burdened gross margin=(1.5-1-0.10 to 0.14)/1.5=24.0-26.7%. Actual taxes, insurance and benefits may differ; neither those assumptions nor the 25/35/50/65/75% markup cases are industry medians.
Source basis
Definition: Markup=(bill rate-pay rate)/pay rate. Unburdened spread=(bill-pay)/bill. Burdened gross margin=(bill-pay-burden)/bill, with burden in dollars or explicitly as a share of pay; assumptions are not measured medians.
Source: Level arithmetic with assumed payroll burden and independent markup inputs
Workers-comp reserves and premiums require different records.
Workers Comp Cost as % of Payroll (light industrial, by risk tier)
Source / sample: Independent Level workers-comp planning scenarios; use actual state, class, experience modifier and carrier quote
The 4/8/14% premium-to-payroll inputs are planning sensitivities. Public-company reserve-development or cash-flow changes are different measures and do not establish an insurer quote for your firm. Reconcile policy premiums, state/class codes, payroll and claims with actual reserve accounting before comparing.
Source basis
Definition: Applicable workers-compensation premium divided by covered payroll for the same policy period. Claims reserves, reserve development and class-code loss costs are different measures; use actual insurer, state and exposure records.
Source: Level premium-to-payroll planning sensitivities; TrueBlue reserve-accounting and NCCI loss-cost context are different measures
Model and segment planning references
Staffing & RecruitingIndependent retained inputs for operating scenarios. They are not measured common-cohort medians or expected outcomes.
IT / Technology
Previously attributed filing reference: Gross margin (Kforce 2024)
26.5%
Previously attributed filing reference; exact value and scope not reverified
Not a measured Level sample
Finance & Accounting
Previously attributed filing reference: Gross margin (Kforce 2024)
38.5%
Previously attributed filing reference; exact value and scope not reverified
Not a measured Level sample
Engineering / Design
Previously attributed reference: Gross margin (Staffing Hub)
~33% input
Previously attributed Staffing Hub reference; exact edition, value and population not reverified
Not a measured Level sample
Healthcare / Travel
Previously attributed reference: Gross margin (Staffing Hub)
~21% input
Previously attributed Staffing Hub reference; exact edition, value and population not reverified
Not a measured Level sample
Light Industrial
Previously attributed filing reference: Gross margin (TBI proxy)
~25.9%
Previously attributed filing reference; exact value and scope not reverified
Not a measured Level sample
Executive Search
Planning reference: Model
Perm fee, high margin, lumpy
Retained planning input; exact source population unverified
Not a measured Level sample
Advanced Staffing & Recruiting Metrics
Sub-segment breakdowns, advanced operational metrics, and clearly labeled reference ranges for industrial, clerical, healthcare, it & executive staffing.
Reference A, center and reference C retain the existing comparison positions. They are not common measured percentiles, ascending numerical bins or proven quality ranks. Each source observation and planning input retains its own definition and population.
Expand complete Staffing & Recruiting reference table (13 metrics with source & sample notes)Includes lower, center, and upper reference points alongside evidence classification and sample disclosures.
| Metric | Reference A | Center reference | Reference C | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin (IT) | < 22% | 26-28% | > 32% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent IT staffing gross-margin planning bands. Previously attributed public-filing context has not been reverified here; reconcile contract versus placement fees, burden and period before comparing. |
| Gross Margin (Healthcare) | < 18% | 21-24% | > 27% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent healthcare staffing gross-margin planning bands. Verify actual assignment mix, bill/pay rates, payroll burden and period; no measured industry percentiles or trend cause are established. |
| Gross Margin (Light Industrial) | < 22% | 25-28% | > 30% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent light-industrial gross-margin planning bands. Previously attributed public-company context has not been reverified here; reconcile direct labor and burden definitions. |
| EBITDA Margin | < 4% | 7-10% | > 12% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent EBITDA-margin planning bands. Adjusted EBITDA and unadjusted earnings are distinct; verify filing period, segment and every adjustment before comparison. |
| Operating Margin | < 3% | 4-5% | > 7% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent operating-margin planning bands, not verified public-company or agency percentiles. Reconcile the reporting period and operating-cost scope. |
| Net Profit Margin | negative in a down year | 3-4% | > 5% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent net-margin planning bands. Previously attributed company figures are not reverified here; separate taxes, interest and nonrecurring items before comparison. |
| DSO | > 65 days | 45-55 days | < 35 days | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent DSO planning bands. A year-end receivables/revenue proxy differs from a period-average collection statistic; match the numerator, denominator and billing scope. |
| Working-Capital per $1M New Temp Revenue | > $150K | $100-125K | < $90K | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent working-capital planning inputs per $1M new temporary-staffing revenue. In an assumed 7-day payroll-payment and 45-55-day collection case, the timing difference is 38-48 days, not a funding requirement by itself. Forecast actual dated flows, margins, available cash and facilities. The $100-125K table inputs and $60K-$100K worksheet inputs per $1M are independent capital sensitivities, not the result of revenue times the 38-48-day illustration. Compute actual funding from dated payroll, receipts, operating costs and cash/facility balances. |
| Time-to-Fill Planning Days | > 30 days | 15-20 days | < 10 days | Evidence: Scoped published observation plus independent planning bands Sample: Nearly 2,300 surveyed professionals globally; subgroup count not captured Bullhorn GRID 2026 reports that 56% of its 25%+ revenue-growth top-performer subgroup reported an average time to place under 10 days; 22% reported average placement times of three days or less. These are reported associations in a global vendor survey, not causal targets. Displayed duration bands are separate planning inputs; subgroup size is not captured. |
| GP per Producer (annual) | < $200K | $300K | > $400K | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent Level planning gross profit inputs; public company GP/producer FTE needs actual eligible headcount and same period, not inferred quartiles. |
| Recruiter Turnover (annual) | > 40% | ~25% | < 20% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent internal recruiter-turnover planning bands with the exact prior research sample unverified. Define internal employees separately from placed temporary workers and use average eligible headcount. |
| Top 5 Client Concentration | > 60% | 30-40% | < 20% | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ Independent client-concentration planning bands. Check revenue, contribution, renewal dates and credit exposure separately; no measured common quartile distribution is supplied. |
| Client NPS (Clearly Rated) | < 25 | 45 | > 60 | Evidence: Retained planning or previously attributed reference; exact measurement unverified Sample: No measured common population; planning references differ The center is a previously attributed 2024 client-NPS reference with exact eligible sample and survey method unverified. Outer bands are planning comparisons, not measured percentiles. Verify promoters, detractors and respondent coverage. |
Staffing & Recruiting Agency Software Stack
ATS, Timesheet Billing, Payroll Funding Float, and Ledger Reconciliation
Staffing agencies pay W-2 temporary workers every Friday while enterprise clients pay net-30 to net-60. Protecting agency cash and gross margin requires a tight bridge between ATS placements, approved client timesheets, payroll funding/factoring reserves, Bill.com back-office AP, and QuickBooks Online or Sage Intacct.
ATS & Middle-Office Layer
Bullhorn, Avionte, Ceipal & Sense
Manages candidate sourcing, job orders, bill/pay rate spreads, approved weekly timesheets, and direct-hire placement fee schedules.
Payroll Funding, AP & GL Layer
ADP / Paychex, Factoring Lines, Bill.com (BILL), QBO & Sage Intacct
Executes weekly multi-state W-2 temp payroll, routes Corp-to-Corp (C2C) sub-vendor invoices through Bill.com, and reconciles AR factoring advances and reserve holdbacks.
Where the Seam Breaks
Unmatched timesheet-to-payroll weeks & factoring reserve drift
Paying temp hours or C2C sub-vendor bills that were rejected on the client VMS portal, miscalculating statutory burden in bill-pay spread, or booking net factoring wires to AR corrupts agency margin.
| Software / Ledger | Operational Role & Best Fit | Typical Cost & Paired Ledgers | Where the Subledger-to-GL Seam Breaks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bullhorn / Avionte BOLD | Applicant tracking (ATS), VMS timesheet import & middle-office bill/pay engine Commercial, industrial, IT, healthcare, and finance staffing agencies ($2M to $100M+) | Pricing: Per-seat monthly subscription (~$100 to $300+/user/mo by edition and back-office modules) Ledgers: QuickBooks Online, Sage Intacct, NetSuite | When enterprise clients approve hours inside a third-party VMS (Fieldglass, Beeline) while temps submit hours in the agency portal, any discrepancy between paid hours and VMS-approved billed hours becomes an immediate 100% margin loss. |
| Payroll Funding / AR Factoring Portals + Bill.com (BILL) Sub-Vendor AP | Weekly temp-payroll working-capital advances, lockbox collections & Corp-to-Corp (C2C) sub-vendor payouts Growing temp, IT, and healthcare staffing firms bridging weekly payroll and C2C contractor bills against 45-to-65-day client DSO | Pricing: Discount/interest fee on funded invoices + Bill.com ($45 to $79/user/mo) Ledgers: QuickBooks Online, Sage Intacct (via Factoring Advance, Reserve & Bill.com Clearing accounts) | Factoring companies advance 80% to 90% of billed invoices, hold 10% to 20% in a reserve account, and deduct discount fees upon client payment. Booking advances as AR payments instead of short-term funding liabilities (or releasing Bill.com C2C sub-vendor ACH payments before VMS hours are verified) makes both AR and gross margin wrong. |
| QuickBooks Online vs. Sage Intacct | General ledger, temp vs. perm revenue segmentation & recruiter commission tie-out QBO for $1M to $20M agencies; Sage Intacct for multi-entity or multi-state high-volume contract staffing | Pricing: QBO $99 to $235/mo; Sage Intacct ~$15,000 to $45,000+/yr Ledgers: Primary General Ledger of record | Direct-hire placement fees carry a 30-to-90-day candidate replacement or refund guarantee, and recruiter commissions must track actual collected gross margin rather than uncollected billed invoices. |
Operator Reconciliation Playbooks & Accounting Controls
Compare all industry accounting & ERP stacks →Contract & Temp Staffing Margin ControlReconciling VMS-approved billable hours against weekly W-2 payroll and statutory burden
With contract staffing gross margins often sitting between 18% and 28%, a 2% timesheet leakage or unallocated SUTA/workers-comp spike wipes out a quarter of agency EBITDA.
Reconciling VMS-approved billable hours against weekly W-2 payroll and statutory burden
With contract staffing gross margins often sitting between 18% and 28%, a 2% timesheet leakage or unallocated SUTA/workers-comp spike wipes out a quarter of agency EBITDA.
- Run a weekly pre-billing tie-out matching every paid temp hour in payroll and every Bill.com C2C sub-vendor invoice against an approved client timesheet or VMS batch before invoices and paychecks release.
- Track true fully loaded gross margin by client and recruiter using actual employer FICA, FUTA, state SUTA reset rates, workers-comp class codes, and ACA/sick-leave accruals rather than a flat guessed burden percentage.
- Maintain a dedicated Factoring Reserve and Funding Liability reconciliation every week so lockbox collections, client short-pays, and funding fees tie to the penny.
Closed-Month Staffing Margin & Factoring Diagnostic
Want us to reconcile your Bullhorn/VMS timesheets, weekly temp payroll, and factoring reserves?
We test one closed month across your VMS-approved billable hours vs. paid W-2 and Bill.com C2C hours, state SUTA and workers-comp burden tables, and factoring advance/reserve clearing accounts in QuickBooks or Intacct.
Benchmarks for other service businesses
Simple pricing
Three tiers, one ladder.
$500+/mo
Bookkeeping
The clean data layer: monthly books, reconciliations, and organized financials AI can work with.
$1,500-$5,000/mo
Scale
The full AI operating layer: custom agents, weekly actions, and benchmarks to grow margin per hour.
Custom
Platform / Multi-Office
Multi-branch benchmarking and scorecards for PE-backed and multi-location groups.
How does your staffing agency compare?
Compare these references with your own revenue, costs and cash records, then choose the pricing, staffing or collection change to test first.
No commitment. Real numbers, not generic advice.
Frequently asked questions
What's a healthy gross margin for a staffing agency?
Use the retained segment bands as planning context, not current measured industry quartiles. Public company references and fee-only permanent placement use different models. Compare payroll burden, segment, bill rate, utilization and reporting period.
What is the difference between markup and gross margin?
Markup=(bill-pay)/pay; burdened gross margin=(bill-pay-burden)/bill. In a 50% markup scenario with 10-14% burden of pay, the margin is 24.0-26.7%, compared with 33.3% unburdened spread. Verify actual taxes, benefits and insurance; the assumed burden is not a universal rate.
What is a normal DSO for a staffing company?
The 45-55 day band is a planning reference. The previously attributed Level-derived Robert Half 49-day proxy is a year-end AR/revenue proxy, not an SMB average or universal funding rule. Forecast dated payroll and collections with available cash and facilities before deciding whether financing is needed.
What time-to-fill planning should I target?
Bullhorn GRID 2026 reports 56% of 25%+ growth top performers reporting an average time to place under 10 days and 22% reporting average placement times of three days or less in a global vendor survey. These are subgroup associations, not firm percentiles or causal targets. Measure your eligible orders, candidate acceptance, placements and client requirements.
What revenue should each recruiter generate?
The producer chart uses independent gross-profit planning inputs, not verified top quartiles. Use the same period and eligible producer FTE, then compare gross profit with loaded internal cost. Revenue per recruiter, gross profit per producer and compensation ratios are different measures.
Sources
- • Staffing Industry Analysts (SIA), U.S. forecast updates 2024-2025 (only values with an exact captured source are verified; other attribution is historical context)
- • American Staffing Association (ASA), quarterly industry statistics (only values with an exact captured source are verified; other attribution is historical context)
- • Bullhorn GRID, 2026 Industry Trends Report (shares of average time-to-place in a vendor top-performer subgroup) (only values with an exact captured source are verified; other attribution is historical context)
- • Hunt Scanlon / Recruiterflow, recruiter productivity benchmarks (only values with an exact captured source are verified; other attribution is historical context)
- • BLS Current Employment Statistics, temp help services (CES6056132001) (only values with an exact captured source are verified; other attribution is historical context)
- • Public staffing 10-Ks: Robert Half (RHI), Kforce (KFRC), ASGN, TrueBlue (TBI), Kelly (KELYA) (only values with an exact captured source are verified; other attribution is historical context)
- • Level staffing operating guidance; no measured Level staffing-agency cohort is supplied. Contractor research is a separate population.
- • Staffing Hub 2024 survey (historical attribution only; exact edition, population and values not reverified)
- • ClearlyRated NPS reference (historical attribution only; exact edition, population and values not reverified)
The Level Index combines named research sources with clearly labeled Level estimates. Each figure has its own source, time period and definition. The planning ranges are examples, rather than measured results from Level clients. Check that your business model and accounting methods fit the comparison. © 2026 Level. All rights reserved.
Read the source basis and limits beside each reference. Definitions and sample sizes are shown when captured from the reviewed source. Download this dataset (JSON, free to cite).