Compare
KI BMS: the alternative to Kenjo
What moving from Kenjo to KI BMS actually looks like in 2026.
KI BMS is what people use when Kenjo stops fitting. Below is the honest side-by-side - same product surface, different posture: hosted in Germany, no third-party trackers, one honest price - plus the migration mechanics that decide whether the switch lands in an evening or in a quarter.
At a glance
Kenjo is a fair pick when you want a lean all-in-one HR suite: personnel files, time tracking, shift planning, documents, reporting - and recruiting as an add-on module. The recruiting module is solid (careers page, many job-board connections, LinkedIn import, application phases, scorecards). For a team primarily digitalising HR admin, Kenjo is hard to beat. KI BMS is right when recruiting is the bottleneck and you want KI pre-sort with per-application reasoning as a default - not as another tab in an HR suite. Both host in the EU. If you need both, it's often cheap to run Kenjo for HR and KI BMS for recruiting side by side.
Switching
What moving from Kenjo actually looks like
The switch goes in three rough phases: export from Kenjo, import into KI BMS, and reorganise what came over. Most people allocate an evening for it. The export side is where the time goes - Kenjo hands you a CSV/JSON dump and the field mapping isn't always obvious; once that's resolved the import is a couple of minutes. We don't paywall the import path or pretend it's a pro-only feature, and you can run both side-by-side while you decide.
KI BMS vs Kenjo: feature comparison
When to pick which
Pick KI BMS when
Pick Kenjo when
Where Kenjo honestly shines
Kenjo bridges feature breadth and price better than most all-in-one suites. Entry is around €5.40 per person per month for personnel admin, time tracking, shift planning, documents and reporting; recruiting comes as an add-on. For a 30-person team primarily digitalising HR admin, that's a very fair deal. Data sits in the EU, there's a DPA, German DPOs are usually satisfied.
The recruiting module is more than a token, too: own careers page, connection to many job boards, direct LinkedIn import of sourced candidates, custom application phases per role, scorecards with skills, tags and comments. For 1-4 roles a year that cleanly covers recruiting reality - and you keep the application and later the personnel file in one tool.
Where the specialist goes deeper
The difference shows up exactly when volume rises. Kenjo's scorecards are manual - you score yourself. KI BMS adds a KI fit-score with reasoning per application that knows the requirements profile and, out of 120 inbound, surfaces the 15 you should read first. At four roles a year that's irrelevant. At forty it's the difference between 'doable' and 'the funnel backs up'.
The second difference is GDPR retention. Kenjo stores in the EU and provides a DPA - but anonymising rejected applications after the deadline is a manual task. KI BMS has a built-in switch: 'auto-anonymise after X months', plus an audit log recording who set which status when. Anyone rejecting regularly doesn't want to maintain that by hand.
The combination for 30 people
If you need an HR suite anyway, the clean setup is often both side by side. Kenjo for files, time and shifts; KI BMS for the recruiting funnel, where speed and KI matter. The tools barely need to talk - on a hire you create the person fresh in Kenjo, the application record stays archived in KI BMS. For 30 people the math is low: Kenjo HR plus KI BMS Power (€10 flat per month) is cheaper than most suites with comparable recruiting depth.
Export from Kenjo
Find the export option in Kenjo's account settings. Most tools provide a CSV or JSON download. Save the dump locally - that's the source of truth for the next step.
Map fields in KI BMS
Open the import tool in KI BMS. Kenjo's field names rarely match KI BMS' 1:1; the import flags any unmapped columns so you can pair them up before anything commits.
Run the import
Run the import. KI BMS shows a preview of the first parsed rows in the import dialog so you can sanity-check the column mapping + a sample of records before anything commits. If you're nervous about a large dump, import a small subset first, verify it landed the way you expected, then run the full file.
Re-create your views, tags, saved searches
Kenjo-specific UI metadata (custom views, saved filters, in-app annotations) doesn't transfer with the data export. Spend an evening rebuilding the views you used most - usually a 30-minute job once you've done it once.
Cancel Kenjo when you're confident
Run both side-by-side for a couple of weeks if you want to be sure. When you're confident, cancel the Kenjo subscription from their side. KI BMS keeps your export option self-serve in account settings - no lock-in either direction.
Switching from Kenjo
The five questions we get most often before someone moves their data over.
Start with KI BMS
Free plan, no credit card. We host in Germany. Export + delete are self-serve.
Written by
Julia Yukovich
Co-Founder + CEO
Julia is one of the Co-Founders. She handles design, product direction, and most of the support replies that arrive in the morning.
Read next
Full KI BMS vs Kenjo
All-in-one HR with recruiting add-on vs dedicated KI ATS - decision grid for 10-80-person teams.
Read
KI BMS vs Factorial: all-in-one HR platform or recruiting specialist?
Broad HR platform with a recruiting module vs dedicated ATS. Decision grid for 20-200-person companies.
Read
KI BMS vs rexx HR: heavy suite vs lean specialist
rexx HR covers the full HR spectrum + ATS in a suite. KI BMS is recruiting only - but faster and with KI from day 1.
Read
KI BMS vs Personio: the right recruiting tool for modern HR teams
Suite vs specialist: when an integrated HR tool wins - and when a dedicated ATS sets you free.
Read