# Which background check platforms have the fastest turnaround and simplest ordering process so HR does not have to chase down results or navigate a clunky portal?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Posting here, looking for <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/background-check">background check</a> tools, specifically on turnaround speed and ordering simplicity, the two dimensions that determine whether background checks slow down an offer or move in parallel with it.</p><ol>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/zinc-work/reviews"><strong>Zinc</strong></a><strong>:</strong> HR enters the candidate details once, and Zinc handles everything else, including automated candidate communication, referee chasing via SMS and email, and real-time status updates. The platform pulls employment verification data directly from HMRC (UK) in minutes, making UK checks exceptionally fast.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/backgroundchecks-com/reviews"><strong>BackgroundChecks.com</strong></a><strong>:</strong> The ordering flow is described as straightforward, self-service, and quick to navigate with results available as quickly as the same day in many cases. Applicants fill in their own information, eliminating the data entry and error correction cycle. Customer communication is described as quick and detailed.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/victig-background-checks/reviews"><strong>VICTIG Background Checks</strong></a><strong>:</strong> Turnaround is described as shorter than prior vendors, and the support team calls counties directly when records need clarification rather than placing the check on hold. The ordering process requires entering only a name and email address.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/cisive-cisive/reviews"><strong>Cisive</strong></a><strong>:</strong> Reports are described as returned instantly in many cases, with the team proactively updating employers when any issues arise during processing. The online chat support during business hours resolves issues rapidly rather than requiring email back-and-forth, and the support team can receive and transmit documents directly through the chat. </li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/checkr/reviews"><strong>Checkr</strong></a><strong>:</strong> The dashboard provides clear visibility into where each candidate is in the process without manual follow-up, and the automated link-based candidate invitation means HR does not need to manually enter applicant information. Results come back quickly in the majority of cases. </li>
</ol><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For HR teams running time-sensitive hires, at what point in the process does the delay most often occur? Is it candidate response time, county-level processing, or platform-side holds that a better support model could resolve faster?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 3 months ago
- Author title: Marketing Executive
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;What would sell me on Cisive over the others is the live chat support during business hours, not the turnaround numbers. Getting a stuck document resolved in real time probably saves as much time as any part of the actual screening process. A fast turnaround claim doesn&#39;t mean much if the one document holding everything up sits in an email queue waiting on a reply.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 5 days ago
- Author title: Marketing



### Comment 2

&lt;p&gt;Preksha’s point about county-level delays makes the distinction clearer. Some turnaround time is outside the platform’s control, so proactive status visibility may matter more than promising the fastest check. I’d want to know whether any provider clearly separates an external processing delay from something actually waiting on their side.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 8 days ago
- Author title: Writer



### Comment 3

&lt;p&gt;County-level processing is usually the hardest delay to control, but platform-side holds are where vendor support can really make a difference. If the provider proactively follows up instead of leaving HR to chase status updates, that can shave a lot of time off the process.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 9 days ago
- Author title: Marketer



### Comment 4

From what I’ve seen, delays are rarely just about the platform. Zinc handling candidate follow-ups is interesting because that’s usually where things stall. Once you remove that step, everything feels faster. I’m curious to know where have you actually seen the lag happen most, candidate response or backend processing?

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 3 months ago
- Author title: Writer





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4