GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Education LearningTop 10 Best Resume Formatting Software of 2026
Top 10 Resume Formatting Software ranked by layout control, templates, and export options, for job seekers comparing tools like Resume.io and Canva.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Resume.io
Template-based resume generation that keeps formatting consistent per section schema.
Built for fits when users need predictable, schema-based resume formatting at scale..
Canva
Editor pickBrand Kit applies reusable colors and type styles across resume templates.
Built for fits when job seekers need fast, consistent visual resumes with team brand alignment..
Google Docs
Editor pickNamed paragraph styles applied across sections for consistent resume formatting.
Built for fits when collaboration and API-driven document generation matter more than fixed layout precision..
Related reading
Comparison Table
This comparison table maps resume formatting tools by integration depth, data model design, and the automation and API surface exposed for programmatic generation. It also contrasts admin and governance controls such as RBAC, audit log coverage, and provisioning workflow, plus practical extensibility and configuration patterns that affect throughput and maintenance. Entries include Resume.io, Canva, Google Docs, LaTeX, Overleaf, and other tools that fit different schema and integration requirements.
Resume.io
web builderWeb-based resume builder that generates structured resume content from form inputs and exports formatted resume output.
Template-based resume generation that keeps formatting consistent per section schema.
Resume.io centers on template-driven formatting that converts section inputs into a document with consistent typography and ordering. It supports structured section models such as experience, education, and skills, which makes it easier to apply repeatable formatting rules across candidate profiles. Where automation matters, the relevant differentiator is whether Resume.io output and section data can be exchanged through API or export flows that preserve schema structure.
A key tradeoff is that template formatting controls can limit custom layout decisions compared with a pure design editor. Resume.io fits situations where a hiring team or job seeker needs high-throughput document generation with stable formatting from a maintained data model. The best fit appears when the workflow requires predictable sections and repeatable output across many versions.
- +Template-driven ATS layout consistency across resume sections
- +Structured resume data model supports repeatable formatting
- +Exports and automation paths reduce manual reformatting
- –Custom layout flexibility is constrained by template boundaries
- –Complex multi-column designs require workarounds or manual edits
Job seekers
Generate ATS-friendly resumes quickly
Fewer formatting inconsistencies
Career coaches
Standardize client resume revisions
Repeatable deliverables
Show 2 more scenarios
Recruiting operations teams
Automate resume document generation
Higher throughput
Feeds structured candidate fields into resume outputs through API or export workflows.
Resume writing workflows
Control formatting via configuration
Lower rework rates
Uses template schema and configuration to keep section ordering and typography stable.
Best for: Fits when users need predictable, schema-based resume formatting at scale.
More related reading
Canva
template designDesign and template workflow for resume creation with structured text blocks and export formats suited to document generation.
Brand Kit applies reusable colors and type styles across resume templates.
Canva fits hiring teams and job seekers who need repeatable resume layouts without rebuilding documents each time. Designers can apply global typography and color styles, then swap content while preserving grid alignment and section spacing. Teams can manage shared brand elements and collaboration through workspace permissions tied to project files.
A key tradeoff is limited schema-level control over resume structure, since resumes are assembled from design objects rather than validated from a formal resume data model. Canva works well when resumes follow visual conventions that can be expressed with templates and text blocks. It is less ideal when strict data validation, field-level audit trails, or deterministic generation from a structured schema are required.
- +Template layouts keep section alignment consistent across versions
- +Brand kit controls standardize typography and colors across documents
- +Team sharing and permissions support controlled collaboration
- +Export and sharing flows fit hiring workflows and file handoffs
- –Resume content lacks strict schema validation for structured fields
- –Automation depends on integrations, with limited document-level triggers
- –API-driven generation has less deterministic control over layout objects
HR branding teams
Standardize candidate-facing resume visuals
Fewer visual inconsistencies
Job seekers
Rapidly generate new resume versions
Faster version turnaround
Show 2 more scenarios
Recruiting agencies
Maintain branded resumes across clients
Higher output consistency
Workspace permissions and brand assets reduce design drift between client submissions.
Design ops teams
Coordinate resume assets and styles
Lower maintenance overhead
Central asset management supports controlled publishing of templates and style updates.
Best for: Fits when job seekers need fast, consistent visual resumes with team brand alignment.
Google Docs
collaborative docsCollaborative document system with resume templates and formatting controls that export to common document formats.
Named paragraph styles applied across sections for consistent resume formatting.
Google Docs uses a document data model made of structural elements like paragraphs, runs, lists, tables, and named styles, which supports consistent resume formatting across multiple sections. Formatting can be standardized with style sheets for headings, body text, and lists, and it can be applied repeatedly without manual rework. Drive provides document versioning and permission inheritance for resumes stored in shared folders.
A tradeoff is that Google Docs formatting is best at reproducing structure and style, while advanced layout control such as multi-column typography and pixel-level alignment can require workarounds like tables or manual adjustments. It fits situations where resume drafts must be edited with recruiters or hiring teams in real time, or where batches of resumes must be generated and exported through the Docs API workflow.
- +Shared styles keep section headings and bullets consistent across resume versions
- +Drive version history and permissions reduce formatting loss during collaboration
- +Docs API and Drive API support programmatic generation and export
- +RBAC via Workspace roles and group access controls limits editor exposure
- –Pixel-perfect alignment is harder than in dedicated layout tools
- –Complex resume templates can be fragile across copy and paste operations
Job seekers with collaborative review
Recruiter edits with shared version history
Faster revisions with fewer inconsistencies
HR ops and recruiting teams
Batch resume exports for screening
Higher throughput for review
Show 2 more scenarios
Systems teams running Workspace
Governed sharing for candidate documents
Controlled access across folders
Workspace access controls restrict editing and sharing using RBAC and group-based permissions.
Talent acquisition coordinators
Template-driven resume updates
Consistent formatting across candidates
Coordinators apply style rules to keep dates, headings, and bullets uniform.
Best for: Fits when collaboration and API-driven document generation matter more than fixed layout precision.
LaTeX
schema-driven typesettingMarkup-based typesetting that supports deterministic resume layout using reusable classes and templates for high control.
LaTeX class and macro system for defining resume layout schemas and section structure.
LaTeX in resume formatting contexts is distinct because it treats documents as source files with a stable markup data model. It supports template-driven resume generation through LaTeX classes and packages that define layout rules, section structure, and typography.
Automation typically relies on the LaTeX build toolchain and repeatable compilation, which makes output deterministic for versioned inputs. Integration depth comes from extensibility through macros and package configuration rather than external API calls.
- +Document data model is source-first, enabling reproducible resume outputs from version control
- +Extensible classes and macros support custom section schemas and layout rules
- +Configuration via packages and options controls typography, spacing, and headers
- +Automation fits CI pipelines by compiling deterministic TeX sources into PDFs
- –No native admin or RBAC layer for teams or managed provisioning
- –Automation surface is the build toolchain, not a resumable REST or GraphQL API
- –Schema changes require LaTeX macro edits, which increases maintenance overhead
- –Review workflows depend on text-based diffs, not field-level form interfaces
Best for: Fits when individuals or technical teams need deterministic resume generation from versioned templates.
Overleaf
latex editorCloud LaTeX editor that manages resume sources and compiles templates into PDF outputs for consistent formatting.
Real-time LaTeX compilation preview inside the editor for resume layout iteration.
Overleaf formats and compiles LaTeX resumes through a web editor that tracks document history and builds on publication-ready templates. It supports bibliography and cross-references, so resume sections can stay consistent across updates.
Integration depth depends on document export and LaTeX toolchain compatibility rather than a dedicated resume schema. Automation and extensibility are mostly file and project driven, with integration patterns centered on sharing, versioning, and build outputs.
- +Web-based LaTeX editing with version history per document project
- +Template-driven resume formatting with LaTeX compilation feedback
- +Shareable project collaboration with granular access options
- +Export options for PDF and source files for downstream workflows
- –Resume data model is LaTeX source, not a structured resume schema
- –Automation relies on document export and build outputs, not a resume API
- –Admin governance controls are limited compared to enterprise document platforms
- –Automation throughput depends on compile workload and file size
Best for: Fits when resume formatting needs LaTeX fidelity and collaborative editing without custom data models.
ResumeGenius
web builderGuided resume builder that turns section inputs into formatted resume drafts and exports final documents.
Template-based section formatting that enforces consistent layout from structured resume fields.
ResumeGenius focuses on resume formatting workflows that turn structured inputs into consistent document layouts. The product’s distinct value comes from its formatting templates, section rules, and controlled style output across roles and experience levels.
ResumeGenius supports automation-style usage through guided generation steps that reduce manual layout corrections. The workflow model centers on reusable schema-like fields such as roles, skills, and summaries to drive repeatable formatting outcomes.
- +Template-driven formatting keeps headings, spacing, and section order consistent
- +Guided generation reduces manual layout fixes after content entry
- +Role and experience specific templates support repeatable document structure
- +Structured inputs map cleanly to common resume section patterns
- –Limited visibility into a formal data schema for custom mappings
- –Automation control appears more interactive than API-driven
- –Extensibility options for custom formatting rules are not clearly documented
- –Admin governance features like RBAC and audit logs are not evident
Best for: Fits when a single writer needs consistent resume formatting without building tooling around it.
Novorésumé
template editorResume template editor that assembles structured content into formatted resume sections and outputs documents.
Template editor that applies formatting conventions to resume sections during content updates.
Novorésumé differentiates by focusing on structured resume templates that convert job data into consistent formatting across sections. The editor supports schema-like layout rules for headings, bullets, and spacing, which reduces manual alignment drift when updating roles.
Document generation is guided by configurable styling and reusable content blocks, which improves throughput for frequent resume revisions. Integration depth is limited versus automation-first tools because the exposed surface concentrates on export and template rendering rather than a public API.
- +Template-driven layout rules keep section formatting consistent across edits
- +Reusable sections reduce time spent reformatting headings and bullet spacing
- +Export output maintains predictable typography for common resume formats
- –Limited public API reduces automation and data model extensibility
- –Automation controls are largely UI-based instead of workflow orchestration
- –Governance features like RBAC and audit logs are not prominent
Best for: Fits when individuals or small teams need repeatable resume formatting without building custom automation.
Teal
resume builderTeal provides resume and job application document building with editable sections and export flows aimed at formatting consistency across applications.
Campaign and document data model that drives consistent, repeatable resume formatting outputs.
In resume formatting workflows, Teal pairs document generation with structured campaign data so formatting stays consistent across applications. It uses a defined data model for roles, companies, and tailored content, which makes schema-driven output predictable.
Teal adds automation via configurable templates and workflow steps that reduce manual copy edits during iteration. Integration depth relies on an automation surface that can connect with external systems through API and webhooks.
- +Schema-driven resume output keeps formatting consistent across tailored versions.
- +Workflow automation reduces repeated manual edits during role iterations.
- +API and webhook surface supports integration with external tracking systems.
- +RBAC and governance controls help limit access across collaborators.
- –Automation and API use require a defined data model upfront.
- –Large template libraries can increase configuration overhead.
- –Throughput depends on template execution complexity and content generation steps.
- –Extensibility often centers on supported automation hooks rather than direct UI customization.
Best for: Fits when teams need controlled resume formatting with API-based automation and RBAC governance.
Resume Worded
layout guidanceResume Worded generates structured resume layouts with scoring feedback tied to sections and formatting patterns used in exports.
ATS-focused formatting feedback tied to template structure and section-level checks.
Resume Worded formats resumes using guided templates, structured content checks, and role-targeted feedback. The core capability centers on turning user-entered sections into consistent document layouts with style rules and ATS-focused formatting guidance.
Integration depth is mostly about input and export, with limited evidence of an external API or automation endpoints for provisioning and orchestration. Automation and governance controls are therefore constrained to in-app configuration and user-level guidance rather than schema-driven workflows.
- +Template-driven formatting reduces layout drift across resume sections
- +ATS-oriented guidance targets common structure and readability issues
- +Role-specific feedback improves consistency with target postings
- +Export output keeps formatting consistent for document sharing
- –External integration surface shows limited API and automation hooks
- –No clear schema model for provisioning resume-format rules
- –Admin governance controls like RBAC and audit logs are not evident
- –Automation throughput is limited to in-app editing workflows
Best for: Fits when individual candidates need repeatable resume formatting and ATS-style checks without integration work.
JobHero
template builderJobHero creates formatted resume drafts from guided fields and outputs documents aligned to its template library.
Template-based resume generation from structured profile fields into export-ready documents
JobHero formats resumes using templates and guided sections tailored for job applications across different roles. It focuses on converting profile content into consistent layouts, then producing export-ready documents.
Integration depends on how JobHero connects with external data sources, since its value scales with the breadth of supported imports and exports. Automation and governance hinge on whether JobHero provides an API or admin controls for provisioning, role-based access, and audit logging.
- +Template-driven formatting enforces consistent resume layouts
- +Guided sections map user data into application-ready document structure
- +Export-ready output supports common resume formats for submission workflows
- –Resume schema and field mapping limits automation beyond manual entry
- –Automation depth depends on API access and integration surface quality
- –Admin governance controls are unclear for multi-user teams and RBAC needs
Best for: Fits when job seekers need consistent resume formatting with minimal customization and limited team workflows.
How to Choose the Right Resume Formatting Software
This buyer's guide covers how resume formatting tools model content, generate consistent layouts, and integrate with existing workflows across Resume.io, Canva, Google Docs, LaTeX, Overleaf, ResumeGenius, Novorésumé, Teal, Resume Worded, and JobHero.
It focuses on integration depth, data model design, automation and API surface, and admin and governance controls so the selection maps to real deployment needs like document generation throughput and role-based access.
Resume formatting software that turns structured candidate data into repeatable document layouts
Resume formatting software converts resume inputs into formatted sections like work history, skills, and summaries using templates, styles, or layout schemas. The main job is reducing layout drift across revisions while keeping formatting predictable for ATS requirements and human readability.
Tools like Resume.io generate section-consistent output from a structured resume data model and template boundaries, while Google Docs applies named paragraph styles across sections and supports programmatic document generation through Google Docs and Drive APIs.
Evaluation criteria for schema-driven output, automation surfaces, and governance control
The right tool depends on how the product represents resume content internally and how that representation can be generated or updated through automation. Resume.io and Teal emphasize structured data models, while Google Docs emphasizes style-based formatting with a document API surface.
Admin and governance controls matter when multiple users collaborate or when formatting must follow internal rules. Canva and Google Docs provide team sharing permissions, while Teal and ResumeGenius lean more on workflow configuration than enterprise governance depth.
Structured resume data model that drives deterministic section formatting
Resume.io uses a structured resume data model so each section can be rendered with consistent formatting boundaries instead of freeform layout edits. Teal also centers a campaign and document data model with schema-driven outputs, which keeps tailored resume versions aligned across a sequence of applications.
Template engines that enforce layout rules per section
ResumeGenius and Novorésumé both enforce consistent headings, spacing, and section order by applying template-based section formatting to structured inputs. Resume.io similarly keeps formatting consistent per section schema, which reduces manual reformatting when content changes.
API and automation surface for generation, update, and export
Resume.io supports automation paths that connect its generated fields into downstream workflows through its API and exports, which fits orchestration use cases. Google Docs pairs its named paragraph style system with Docs API and Drive API support for programmatic generation and export.
Extensibility model for layout schema changes and typography controls
LaTeX and Overleaf use a LaTeX class and macro system where layout rules and section schemas are defined in source templates, which makes deterministic builds possible from versioned inputs. Canva and Google Docs rely more on reusable style controls like Brand Kit and named paragraph styles, which improve consistency but limit strict schema validation for structured fields.
Throughput characteristics tied to compilation and template execution
Overleaf compilation workload and file size can determine automation throughput because output depends on LaTeX build steps. Teal’s throughput depends on template execution complexity and content generation steps, which matters when many tailored applications must be produced in a single workflow run.
Admin governance controls like RBAC and audit logging signals
Teal includes RBAC and governance controls that limit access across collaborators, which fits team-managed resume formatting. Google Docs provides RBAC through Workspace roles and group access controls and relies on Drive permissions and version history for governance signals, while LaTeX and Overleaf lack native admin and RBAC layers for managed provisioning.
A decision framework for picking a resume formatter for automation and governance
Start by mapping the resume content source to the tool’s internal data model so formatting stays deterministic instead of drifting during edits. Resume.io and Teal work best when resume content is already captured as structured fields that can feed a template renderer.
Next, validate how orchestration will run in practice by checking for an automation and API surface that can generate, update, and export documents. Google Docs and Resume.io offer API-driven automation paths, while LaTeX and Overleaf depend on the build toolchain and document export patterns rather than a resume-specific REST interface.
Match the content source to the product’s data model
If candidate information is captured as structured fields like roles, skills, and summaries, Resume.io and Teal fit because both drive formatting from structured inputs. If the work starts as a styled document with collaboration, Google Docs fits better because it applies named paragraph styles across sections.
Choose the formatting mechanism that stays consistent under revision
For schema-based consistency across resume sections, Resume.io and ResumeGenius apply template-driven section formatting that keeps headings, spacing, and section order stable. For a more design-led workflow with reusable typography rules, Canva uses Brand Kit controls to standardize colors and type styles across templates.
Plan automation around the tool’s real API and workflow endpoints
For automation that updates documents programmatically, Google Docs provides Docs API and Drive API support for generation and export, and Resume.io offers API and export paths for workflow integration. For automation based on deterministic builds, LaTeX and Overleaf fit because compilation produces repeatable PDF output from source templates rather than using a resumable resume API.
Evaluate governance needs for multi-user editing and controlled collaboration
When role-based access and governance controls must restrict who can edit or view documents, Teal provides RBAC and governance controls across collaborators. Google Docs supports RBAC through Workspace roles and group access controls and pairs it with Drive permissions and version history signals.
Validate layout fidelity requirements against template flexibility limits
If the requirement is predictable section formatting with fixed template boundaries, Resume.io works well because multi-column customization can require workarounds when designs exceed template boundaries. If pixel-perfect alignment is required, Google Docs is harder to guarantee because complex templates can be fragile across copy and paste operations.
Use automation feedback and validation only where it exists in the product model
When the goal includes ATS-oriented checks tied to formatting patterns, Resume Worded provides formatting feedback tied to template structure and section-level checks. When the goal is generation driven by job data, JobHero and Novorésumé focus on template-based conversion from guided fields into export-ready documents.
Who should buy resume formatting software built for schema control and automation
Resume formatting software fits best when resume output must remain consistent across iterations, targets, or multiple users. The decision hinges on whether the internal model is structured fields, styled documents, or source templates.
The audience below maps directly to how the tools are positioned for best-fit workflows.
Scale-focused resume formatting from structured fields
Resume.io fits when consistent resume formatting at scale depends on template-based generation from a structured resume data model. Teal also fits when teams need schema-driven outputs that stay consistent across tailored versions tied to campaigns.
Team collaboration and API-driven document generation
Google Docs fits teams that need real-time coauthoring with named paragraph styles and govern access through Workspace roles and group access controls. Google Docs also fits automation plans that rely on Docs API and Drive API for programmatic export.
Deterministic, version-controlled layout generation using LaTeX pipelines
LaTeX fits technical teams that want deterministic resume generation from reusable classes and macro-defined schemas in source files. Overleaf fits collaboration on LaTeX sources with real-time compilation preview, while still producing PDF output via the LaTeX toolchain.
Job seekers and small teams prioritizing guided formatting speed
ResumeGenius and Novorésumé fit when repeatable section formatting matters more than building automation around a public API. Resume Worded fits when candidates want ATS-focused formatting feedback tied to template structure and section-level checks.
Applications workflows requiring controlled templates per role or campaign
Teal fits controlled campaign-driven formatting where a defined data model drives consistent, repeatable resume outputs and supports RBAC governance. JobHero fits when guided sections map profile content into template-based, export-ready documents with minimal customization and limited team workflows.
Pitfalls that cause resume formatting drift, weak automation, or governance gaps
The most common failure mode is selecting a tool whose formatting model does not match the way resume content is represented in upstream systems. Another failure mode is assuming layout consistency continues to hold under template complexity, copy and paste operations, or multi-user collaboration.
The fixes below name specific tools that avoid each pitfall by design.
Choosing a freeform document editor when a structured resume schema is required
If upstream data is already structured and the goal is deterministic formatting across sections, Resume.io and Teal handle this by rendering output from structured inputs and schema-like templates. Google Docs focuses on paragraph styles and document formatting behavior, which can be less deterministic for strict schema validation of structured fields.
Assuming layout flexibility scales to multi-column or custom designs without manual work
Resume.io keeps formatting consistent within template boundaries, but complex multi-column designs can require manual edits or workarounds. Canva provides template alignment with Brand Kit, but automation and deterministic layout control for layout objects is more limited than schema-driven renderers.
Overbuilding automation around the wrong surface area
If automation requires programmatic resume-specific updates through a resume schema API, prioritize Resume.io and Google Docs because they support API-driven generation and export paths. If the automation plan assumes a REST API for resumes from LaTeX sources, LaTeX and Overleaf instead rely on the build toolchain and document export workflow.
Ignoring governance requirements for multi-user editing
For team environments with access restrictions, Teal includes RBAC and governance controls, and Google Docs supports Workspace roles and group access controls with Drive permissions and version history signals. LaTeX and Overleaf focus on source templates and collaboration patterns, but they do not provide native admin or RBAC layers for managed provisioning.
Expecting ATS checks to substitute for schema-driven formatting control
Resume Worded provides ATS-focused formatting feedback tied to template structure and section-level checks, but it does not replace deterministic schema rendering across automated workflows. Resume.io and Teal reduce reformatting by enforcing consistent section formatting from structured resume fields and template-based generation.
How these resume formatting tools were selected and ranked
We evaluated Resume.io, Canva, Google Docs, LaTeX, Overleaf, ResumeGenius, Novorésumé, Teal, Resume Worded, and JobHero using criteria that reflect how resume formatting tools behave in real workflows. Each tool was scored on features, ease of use, and value, with features carrying the largest weight at 40 while ease of use and value each account for 30.
Resume.io earned the strongest lift because it combines template-based resume generation with a structured resume data model that keeps formatting consistent per section schema. That combination directly improved the features score and also supported predictable formatting outcomes that reduce rework, which raised ease of use and value compared with tools that rely primarily on styled documents or LaTeX source compilation.
Frequently Asked Questions About Resume Formatting Software
How do Resume.io and Novorésumé keep formatting consistent across multiple resume versions?
Which tools support automation from structured data through APIs or programmable document workflows?
When document accuracy and determinism matter, how do LaTeX and Overleaf differ from WYSIWYG editors?
What integration and storage workflow options are available with Google Docs compared to Canva?
Can team administrators enforce access control and governance for resume formatting workflows?
How do these tools handle data migration when switching from another resume format system?
What are common formatting failures, and which tools reduce them through schema rules or style constraints?
How does extensibility work if a team needs to add custom fields, sections, or layout logic?
What is the main tradeoff between using a template-rendering workflow and editing resumes directly in a document editor?
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 education learning, Resume.io stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Education Learning alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of education learning tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare education learning tools→FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS
Not on this list? Let’s fix that.
Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.
Apply for a ListingWHAT THIS INCLUDES
Where buyers compare
Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.
Editorial write-up
We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.
On-page brand presence
You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.
Kept up to date
We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.