ResumeGo, 2018
One page or two? What the evidence says
Job seekers spend far too much time worrying about whether a resume is allowed to reach page two. The better question is whether every section helps the reader understand why you fit the role. This study challenges the automatic one-page rule, but it does not replace it with a new rule that every resume should be two pages.
Career Boost Labs · Last reviewed July 2026
The finding
ResumeGo ran a hiring simulation with 482 recruiters, hiring managers, HR professionals and executives. Across 7,712 selections made during the exercise, two-page resumes were chosen 2.3 times as often overall, rising to 2.9 times for managerial roles.
Two-page resumes also led for entry-level roles, although by a smaller margin. The useful takeaway is not that two pages always win. It is that relevant detail can help when it adds meaningful evidence.
The better rule: keep what strengthens your case
A second page is neither a failure nor free space. Strong, relevant evidence can deepen the reader's confidence. Weak or repetitive material can dilute the achievements beside it.
That is why we do not force every resume into the same length. We give the roles that support your next move enough space, condense older or less relevant experience, and remove material that does not help the reader understand your fit.
Why we do not use the 10-to-15-year rule
You will often hear that anything older than 10 or 15 years should be removed. We have not found a primary source for that rule, so we do not cut experience by age alone. Older roles may still prove continuity, training, licensure, or experience that matters for the role you want.
What the study cannot tell us
ResumeGo is itself a resume-writing company, and the study used a simulation rather than real hiring outcomes. It shows a preference among participants, not a guarantee that a longer resume will produce more interviews.
Use it to challenge rigid page-count advice, not to replace one rigid rule with another.
Sources
- 1ResumeGo, 2018 — hiring simulation in which 482 recruiters, hiring managers, HR professionals and executives made 7,712 selections; the source of the 2.3x and 2.9x preference figures.
- 2Weaver, Garcia & Schwarz, 2012 — “The Presenter's Paradox”, Journal of Consumer Research 39(3). Peer-reviewed evidence that evaluators average rather than add, which is the mechanism behind dilution.
- 3The “10 to 15 year rule” — no primary source located. We do not apply it and do not state it as a benchmark.