Key Takeaways

We tested three popular Canva CV templates against ATS simulation — all scored 25–38 out of 100 because of columns, text boxes and graphic skill bars.
The identical content in a plain single-column Word document scored 71.
Canva CV ATS compatibility is poor; rebuild in Word for a fair chance of reaching a recruiter.

If you have built your CV in Canva, you are in excellent company. Millions of UK job seekers use Canva to create professional-looking CVs — and it is easy to understand why. The platform is free, the templates look polished, and the results are far more visually appealing than a standard Word document.

The problem is not what your Canva CV looks like to a human recruiter. The problem is what it looks like to the ATS software that sits between your application and that recruiter's inbox.

We ran three popular Canva CV designs through ATS simulation and recorded exactly what the parser extracted. The results are significantly worse than most Canva users expect.

Why Canva CVs Are So Popular in the UK

Canva has grown from a graphic design tool into one of the most widely used CV builders in the UK job market. Its appeal is straightforward:

Professional appearance at zero cost: Canva's free tier includes dozens of CV templates that look as if they were designed by a graphic designer
Ease of use: Drag-and-drop editing requires no design experience
Visual differentiation: In a competitive job market, many candidates believe a distinctive-looking CV will stand out

These are legitimate advantages — in a world where CVs go directly to human readers. But at most large UK employers, that is not the world candidates are applying into.

98% of large UK employers use ATS software (Applicant Tracking Systems) to filter CVs before a recruiter reviews them. The ATS does not see the visual design of your Canva CV. It attempts to extract the underlying text — and Canva's design features are precisely the elements that make text extraction fail.

Why Canva CV Templates Fail ATS Parsing

ATS software converts uploaded documents to plain text before processing them. The parsing engine attempts to identify sections (Work Experience, Education, Skills), extract keywords, and score the application against job requirements.

Canva CVs typically include several features that break this process:

Columns: Almost all Canva CV templates use a two-column or three-column layout. When an ATS reads a multi-column document, it usually processes the text left-to-right across the full page width, merging content from different columns into garbled strings. A job title from one column and a date range from another column end up concatenated, making both unreadable to the parser.

Text boxes: Canva builds its layouts using floating text boxes, not flowing document text. Many ATS parsers cannot reliably extract text from floating text boxes — the content is either skipped entirely or extracted out of sequence.

Graphical skill ratings: A common Canva feature is a visual skills section with star ratings, percentage bars, or dot indicators. These are images, not text. The ATS sees them as blank space or meaningless symbols. The skill names themselves are often placed inside text boxes that also fail to parse.

Decorative section headers: Custom-designed section headers — styled with background colours, unusual fonts, or icon elements — are frequently misidentified or missed by section-detection algorithms. When the ATS cannot identify where "Work Experience" begins, it cannot correctly attribute the content that follows.

Profile photos: Canva templates often include a prominent profile photo. This is irrelevant to the ATS and consumes document space that could contain keyword-rich text.

The Test: Three Canva Templates

We tested three commonly used Canva CV designs against an ATS simulation using a candidate profile for a mid-level marketing role. The same experience and qualifications were used in each version.

Template 1: Two-Column Sidebar Design

This is the most popular Canva CV format. The left column contains a profile photo, contact details, a skills section with visual ratings, and a short personal summary. The right column contains work experience and education.

What the ATS extracted: The parser merged the left and right columns. The result was a text string that began with the contact details, immediately followed by fragments from the first work experience entry, followed by the skill rating images (rendered as blank), then the personal summary, then the education section mixed with more job history. No section was correctly identified.

Keywords successfully extracted: Approximately 35% of the keyword-rich content was readable in context. The rest was either garbled or missing.

ATS score: 28 out of 100.

Template 2: Timeline Layout with Icon-Heavy Skills Section

This design uses a vertical timeline for work experience, with small circular icons marking each role. The skills section uses coloured percentage bars. A decorative header contains the candidate's name in a large custom font.

What the ATS extracted: The timeline icons were read as bullet points with no associated text. The percentage bar skill ratings produced no readable output. The decorative name header was not reliably detected as the candidate's name. Work experience entries were partially extracted but the timeline structure caused date ranges to be separated from their corresponding roles.

Keywords successfully extracted: Approximately 30% of relevant keywords were extracted correctly.

ATS score: 25 out of 100.

Template 3: Clean Minimalist Two-Column

This design is the most restrained of the three — no graphic elements, no skill bars, no icons. It uses a simple two-column layout with a narrow left column for contact information and skills (as plain text) and a wider right column for experience and education.

What the ATS extracted: The two-column structure still caused merging issues, but because the left column contained shorter strings, the damage was less severe. Contact information was partially extracted. Some skills were readable. Work experience was mostly extractable, though some dates were misattributed.

Keywords successfully extracted: Approximately 55% of relevant keywords were correctly extracted.

ATS score: 38 out of 100.

The Same Content in a Plain Word Document

We rebuilt the identical candidate profile in a single-column Microsoft Word document. Standard heading styles. No text boxes. No columns. No tables used for layout. Bullet points from the standard Word bullet list. Contact details at the top of the document body as plain text.

What the ATS extracted: All sections correctly identified. All contact details extracted. All work experience entries matched to correct dates. All skills extracted as readable text.

Keywords successfully extracted: 91% of relevant keywords were correctly identified and scored.

ATS score: 71 out of 100.

The candidate's experience did not change. Their qualifications did not change. Only the container changed — and the score moved from a range of 25–38 to 71. The Canva versions would be filtered out by most ATS systems before a recruiter saw them. The plain Word version cleared the typical 60–75% threshold.

What to Use Instead

The evidence is clear: Canva CVs are visually appealing and functionally problematic for ATS-screened applications.

Here is what to use instead:

Microsoft Word (.docx): The gold standard for ATS compatibility. Use the built-in heading styles (Heading 1 for section titles), a single-column layout, and standard bullet points. Save as .docx rather than PDF.

Google Docs: A reliable alternative if you do not have Word. Export as .docx for applications.

Plain fonts: Use Arial, Calibri, or Georgia. Avoid display fonts, which some ATS systems cannot parse reliably.

No tables for layout: Tables are for data, not for page structure. If you are using a table to create columns or position text, replace it with ordinary paragraphs.

No text boxes: All content should be in the main document body. Nothing in text boxes, headers, or footers.

Standard section headers: Use recognised labels — "Work Experience", "Education", "Skills", "Professional Summary". Avoid creative alternatives.

The resulting document will look simpler than your Canva design. It will also be read correctly by every ATS it encounters, which means your actual experience — which is what a hiring manager cares about — will reach a human reader.

The Key Insight

Your experience, qualifications, and skills are your asset. The CV is simply the container that delivers them to the employer. A Canva template is a beautiful container with a broken delivery mechanism. A plain Word document is an unremarkable container that works every time.

When the ATS scores your CV, it is not judging your career. It is attempting to extract text from a file. Give it a file that makes that easy.

What to Do Next

If you have been using a Canva CV, the fix is straightforward: rebuild in Word with a single-column layout. Check your ATS score free before and after to confirm the improvement.

For a broader understanding of how ATS software works and why UK employers use it, read What Is ATS Software and Why Is It Rejecting Your CV?.

If you are already on a plain-text CV and still not getting responses, the issue may be keyword alignment rather than formatting. Read Why Your CV Isn't Getting Responses in the UK (And How to Fix It) for the complete diagnostic.