AI notetakers make meetings so much easier. Here, we compare Quil and SourceWhale and how they perform when taking AI-generated interview notes. Both offer smart features for recruiters, but they’re built to help you achieve different goals.
One’s a dedicated notetaking platform for recruiters. The other’s an outreach tool with a bonus notetaker.
(Side note: This will be a friendly, healthy comparison between two AI recruiting tools changing the way teams work.)
Read on to figure out which one fits your workflow best.
Quil is an AI recruitment tool purpose-built for recruiting firms.
It works across Zoom, VOIP, phone calls, and even in-person interviews, turning conversations into structured notes and updating ATS fields automatically.
Recruiters have told us that the built-in automation and AI tools in Quil save them 8+ hours a week! Some of the key features include automated candidate submittals, ATS updates, and custom meeting notes. Together, this speeds up their hiring process without losing consistency or quality.
SourceWhale, on the other hand, is a recruitment automation platform with a strong focus on outbound outreach.
It’s used by in-house talent teams and agency recruiters who manage large candidate pipelines through multi-touch campaigns, data enrichment, and workflow automation.
SourceWhale also includes a built-in AI notetaker, though this feature can only be used with other tools in the SourceWhale ecosystem, like their VoIP tool.
Photo credits: Bullhorn GRID 2025 Industry Trends Report
Manual admin is recruiters’ #1 productivity killer. In fact, recruiters spend an average of 3.7 hours per week on admin-related tasks, more than a third of their time.
This is likely why we’re seeing so many AI notetakers at meetings: recruiters are trying to reclaim their time. But not all of these tools are built intentionally for recruiters, meaning they’re missing a lot of dedicated functionality.
Below, we’ll explore 9 key factors to consider when choosing an AI recruitment tool.
No recruiter should be manually logging notes in 2025. Manually logging notes in 2025 is like sending faxes when everyone else is on Slack.
Both Quil and SourceWhale sync notes to your ATS/CRM. Quil updates fields, actions, and notes automatically, so you won’t have to lift a finger.
Comparatively, SourceWhale logs structured summaries to the notes section of your ATS, but it doesn’t update fields or trigger follow-up actions, such as automatically drafting branded candidate submittals.
So it’s helpful, but not fully hands-off.
Verdict: Choose Quil if you want full recruitment automation with AI-driven notes, field updates, and submittals. Go with SourceWhale if automating outreach is your team's main focus.
Quil turns interviews into fully formatted candidate submittals in your company’s branding. Instantly. Tweak it and send it. Done in minutes.
SourceWhale doesn’t create submittals. You’ll still need to do that part manually based on the call summary.
Verdict: Use Quil if you’re looking for a way to speed up the process of sending branded, professional candidate submittals.
Integrations make the magic happen.
SourceWhale connects with over 70 platforms, though not all of them are specific to recruitment. Because it’s a business development tool for recruiters, almost half of their integrations are with contact data providers, like enrichment tools.
Quil, conversely, connects to more than 40 dedicated ATS and recruitment tools. Because Quil is designed to speed up and automate recruitment workflows, you'll find integrations to tools you use every day - like Bullhorn, JobAdder, Greenhouse, and more.
Verdict:If you're looking for deep recruitment automation with ATS-focused integrations, go with Quil.
For outreach-heavy teams that prioritize business development, SourceWhale has more relevant integrations.
Quil adds summaries and categories that sync directly with your ATS. The goal? Give your team immediate context, without having to pore over entire meeting transcripts.
Quil also enriches profiles with smart summaries and categorized notes.
SourceWhale logs structured notes, making it easy to review what was discussed in a call. However, it doesn’t score candidates or categorize them by stage.
It also provides structured notes, but doesn't customize them to candidate stages or scoring fields.
Verdict: For recruiters who need instant context, candidate scoring, and stage-based summaries synced to the ATS, Quil is the clear winner. SourceWhale helps with basic call notes, but lacks deeper customization.
Alt image (ai meeting notetaker)
Meeting types refer to specific categories of interactions designed for different stages of the recruitment process. For instance, reference checks, intake calls, or onboarding.
For each of these, Quil allows you to customize the call objectives, summary structure, and key takeaways. It also offers an unlimited number of custom meeting types, so your team can build dedicated templates specific to your team. Each one comes with prompts, categories, scripts, and formatted outputs.
Under meeting types, there are 4 different aspects:
Here’s an idea of what purpose these meeting types in Quil serve and how they fast-track your hiring process.
[Image]
Quil goes a step further than manual selection. With automatic meeting type prediction, recruiters no longer have to choose whether a call was an “interview” or “reference check.”
Instead, Quil analyzes the conversation itself and assigns the correct type in seconds.
This gives access to the right note categories, scripts, and follow-up materials instantly — saving recruiters time and keeping documentation consistent across the team.
Conversely, SourceWhale gives you 3 pre-set meeting types: Interview, Intake, and BD. They’re clean and structured, but the templates themselves are not editable.
Verdict: If you want customizable meeting types with built-in scripts, note categories, and automated docs for every stage of the recruitment process, choose Quil. SourceWhale works if you only need basic, fixed templates.
Both tools are recruiter-friendly.
Quil shows meetings, call recordings, submittals, and analytics, all in one place. SourceWhale keeps your sequences, inbox, and Notetaker accessible in one simple UI. However, it’s centered around outreach first, then notetaking.
Both platforms are easy to use. Quil’s layout is focused on recruiting workflows. SourceWhale focuses more on outreach and engagement flows.
Verdict: It’s a tie :) Both platforms have an amazing, user-friendly interface.
AI is smart, but you’re smarter.
Maybe you want to change something because AI lacks the ability to understand context or nuance like a human. Or maybe you might like to add a few other pointers outside the AI notetaker’s domain.
Thus, customization is important, and both of these AI notetakers offer this.
However, there are some differences.
With Quil, customization is really easy:
With SourceWhale, customization is a bit rigid:
Verdict: If flexibility and stage-specific templates matter to your workflow, Quil gives you far more room to customize. SourceWhale covers the basics but offers limited control over templates and outputs.
If you can’t track it, you can’t improve it.
Quil has a built-in analytics dashboard that shows you recruiter call time, submittal counts, top performers — you name it.
SourceWhale provides analytics focused on outreach and BD. There’s much less focus on recruiter performance, more on overall pipeline motion. While Quil tracks recruiting-specific metrics (calls, connects, time saved, etc), SourceWhale focuses on analytics for outreach performance.
Verdict: SourceWhale is better suited for teams tracking outreach and pipeline activity. For recruitment-specific analytics like call time, connects, and submittals, Quil gives you the insights you need to optimize hiring.
Quil is fully platform-agnostic. It works anywhere:
SourceWhale’s Notetaker only works if you’re already using SourceWhale’s native VoIP platform. That’s great if you’re all-in on SourceWhale. Not so great if you work off your mobile or a third-party dialer.
It doesn’t extend to mobile or third-party dialers, which can limit teams who mix video calls with phone-based recruiting.
Verdict: Quil offers more flexibility across different call types and setups, ideal for recruiters who aren’t tied to one platform. SourceWhale works well if you're fully using its VoIP, but it limits you outside that ecosystem.
Choosing the right AI recruitment tool comes down to how your team works and what you’re optimizing for.
If your day revolves around interviews, candidate submittals, and keeping your ATS clean, Quil is built for you.
Quil is built for third-party recruiters to automate admin tasks like notes, field updates, and write-ups, saving 8+ hours a week. It works across Zoom, phone, and in-person meetings without sacrificing speed or quality.
If you’re focused on outbound, sales, and follow-up workflows, SourceWhale fits well. Its notetaker is built into the wider outreach platform and gives you structured summaries.
In short:
Both tools boost recruiter productivity, but in very different ways.
We’ve covered everything you need to know when choosing between Quil and SourceWhale.
The final decision? That depends on your firm’s workflow, team setup, and where you spend the most time.
Quil is the only AI notetaker built specifically for third-party recruiters. It works on Zoom, phone calls, and in-person meetings - automating interview notes, submittals, and ATS updates so recruiters can focus on people, not paperwork.
Try it free for 7 days and save 8+ hours per week.
Yes. Zoom, cell, VoIP, in-person. It covers all meeting types.
Yes. AI-generated, customizable, and ready to send.
Yes. It’s an outreach tool first, with note-taking as a secondary feature, which works best for users who already have SourceWhale.
Quil is built specifically for recruiters who want flexible, customizable automation across their workflow.
It offers AI-powered meeting type prediction, customizable templates, notes are organized by recruiting stage (e.g., intake call, first screen, interview, etc.), and deep ATS integrations.
SourceWhale, by contrast, focuses on outbound automation and engagement. Its notetaker produces structured notes but with limited customization and fewer ATS-specific features.
Recruitment automation means using AI and software to take care of repetitive tasks in hiring, like note taking, scheduling calls, sending follow-ups, and updating your ATS. This saves recruiters time, cuts down on mistakes, and lets them focus more on interviews and building relationships with candidates.
Choose Quil if you want a recruiting tool that automates notes, predicts meeting types, and works across Zoom, Teams, Meet, phone calls, and even in-person interviews, all with deep ATS syncing and customizable templates.
Choose SourceWhale if your main focus is outbound outreach and client engagement, with built-in sequencing tools and structured notes, but less flexibility for recruiting workflows.
Quil’s notetaker is built for the full range of recruiter meetings. It can capture and organize notes from recruiting first calls, intake calls with hiring managers, candidate interviews, reference checks, and even client or business development conversations.
SourceWhale’s notetaker also works for candidate and client calls, but with less flexibility. It joins video meetings through Zoom, Teams, or Google Meet, and records calls made through its native VoIP system.
Disclaimer: This comparison is based on product information available at the time of writing. While we aim to keep it accurate and current, features may change over time.
