We Analyzed 400,000 Job Listings. Only 6% Show the Salary.
Nox analyzed 400K+ job listings across 13,000 companies. Only 5.7% disclose salary ranges -- far below industry claims of 12%.
Sixteen states plus Washington D.C. now mandate salary disclosure in job postings. Industry reports regularly cite double-digit adoption rates. HR conferences declare salary transparency the new normal.
The data tells a different story.
Nox continuously monitors job listings across 19 applicant tracking systems, covering 13,000+ employers and 400,000+ active postings. When tallied, only 5.7% of job listings include any salary information whatsoever. Not a tight range. Not a competitive estimate. Any salary data at all.
That figure is roughly half the 12% rate that industry surveys have quoted since 2022, and a fraction of the 54% figure that some global transparency reports have circulated.
Survey Data vs. Observed Reality
Most pay transparency statistics come from employer surveys or job board self-reports. Both have structural incentives to overcount.
Employer surveys ask companies whether they include salary information in postings. When 93% of HR professionals admit to posting ghost jobs at least occasionally (Clarify Capital, 2025), self-reported compliance data deserves skepticism. Companies may have a transparency policy on paper without enforcing it across every requisition.
Job board statistics reflect postings on platforms that actively encourage salary ranges. Indeed and LinkedIn allow employers to add salary data during posting, and their algorithms may favor listings that include it. That creates a selection effect: listings on those boards are more likely to have salary data than the broader universe of postings.
Nox's dataset is pulled directly from employer career pages hosted on ATS platforms, not from aggregator boards. The 5.7% figure represents what employers voluntarily disclose when no intermediary nudges them toward transparency.
Disclosure Rates by ATS Platform
Salary disclosure varies meaningfully across ATS platforms, revealing patterns about company type.
Greenhouse (45.3% of dataset, 181,775 postings) skews toward venture-backed startups and mid-market tech companies. Its disclosure rate hovers slightly above the dataset average, consistent with operating in states with transparency mandates and competing aggressively for technical talent.
SmartRecruiters (26.8%, 107,341 postings) serves a broader industry mix including retail, manufacturing, and professional services. Its disclosure rate falls below average, reflecting that many enterprise customers operate in jurisdictions without requirements.
Ashby (12.2%, 49,116 postings) is the preferred system for high-growth startups, particularly in Silicon Valley and New York. Its disclosure rate trends higher than Greenhouse, likely because its customer base views transparency as a recruiting advantage.
Workday (10.3%, 41,164 postings) powers the largest enterprises: Fortune 500 companies, financial institutions, healthcare systems. Its salary disclosure rate is the lowest among major platforms. Enterprise organizations with complex, multi-band compensation structures and internal equity concerns are the most reluctant to publish ranges.
The Geographic Paradox
The United States accounts for 46% of the dataset, and a significant share of those jobs sit in states with active pay transparency laws. Colorado led the way in 2021. New York City followed in 2022. California took effect in 2023. Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, Vermont, and Massachusetts all enacted requirements in 2025.
Yet the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found in late 2025 that compliance tops out around 75% even in states where disclosure is legally mandated. One in four job listings in covered jurisdictions simply ignores the law.
The enforcement mechanism explains the gap. Most state laws rely on complaint-driven enforcement rather than proactive auditing. Penalties tend to be modest -- often a few hundred to a few thousand dollars per violation. For a company posting hundreds of roles per year, the expected cost of non-compliance is negligible.
International listings fare even worse. The UK (3.4% of dataset) and India (2.4%) have no equivalent federal mandates. The EU Pay Transparency Directive does not take full effect until 2026, with implementation timelines varying by member state.
Why 94% of Employers Still Hide Pay
The reasons cluster into a few categories.
Internal equity concerns. Publishing ranges risks revealing disparities between new hires and existing employees. This is a legitimate operational challenge, but it is an argument for fixing internal pay equity, not for hiding external ranges.
Competitive intelligence. Employers believe publishing salaries exposes their compensation strategy. In practice, services like Levels.fyi, Glassdoor, and Blind have already made compensation data semi-public for most roles at most large companies. The information asymmetry employers want to protect largely no longer exists.
Negotiation leverage. When candidates do not know the budget, employers can anchor offers lower. This is the most straightforward explanation and the one transparency laws are designed to address.
Bureaucratic complexity. Large organizations with global roles and variable compensation structures find it genuinely difficult to assign a range to every posting. Workday's low disclosure rate likely reflects this: when a company has 10,000 employees across 30 countries, the approval chain for publishing ranges can be substantial.
The Candidate Tax
The cost of salary opacity falls entirely on job seekers. A 2026 ABC News survey found that 44% of candidates will not apply to a job without a listed pay range. Another 70.9% said salary information is "very important" or "essential" to their decision to apply.
This creates a perverse dynamic. The most qualified candidates -- who have the most options and the least tolerance for wasted time -- disproportionately filter out opaque listings. Companies hiding salary information are not protecting themselves from overpaying. They are selecting for candidates who are less informed or more desperate.
Where Salary Data Does Appear
Among the 5.7% of listings that include salary information, the median range is $110,000 to $150,000. That figure carries a significant caveat: companies that post salaries tend to be hiring for higher-paying roles in competitive markets. The median salary across all listings, including the 94% that do not disclose, is almost certainly lower.
This selection bias matters for macro-level interpretation. The listings with salary ranges are the tip of the compensation iceberg, weighted toward tech companies in coastal cities hiring senior individual contributors and managers.
The Path Forward
Pay transparency legislation is expanding, but the data makes clear that legislation alone does not produce transparency. Compliance rates plateau well below 100% even in the most aggressive jurisdictions.
The more durable shift will come from market pressure. As candidates increasingly refuse to engage with opaque listings, the 94% of employers currently hiding their salary ranges will face a straightforward choice: disclose and compete, or stay silent and watch the talent pipeline narrow.
The industry claims 12%. The data says 6%. Ninety-four percent of job listings still ask candidates to invest hours in applications without knowing whether the role pays $60,000 or $160,000.
That is not transparency. That is theater.
Sources
- Nox internal dataset: 400,000+ listings across 19 ATS platforms and 13,000+ employers
- Clarify Capital, Ghost Jobs Study (2025)
- Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Pay Transparency Compliance (2025)
- ABC News, Salary Transparency Survey (2026)
Nox monitors 400,000+ job listings across 19 ATS platforms to help job seekers find and apply to the right roles. Try Nox free -- no credit card required.