Willis Towers Watson vs HR DataHub - Which is Best for Salary Benchmarking?

Willis Towers Watson and HR DataHub both help UK employers benchmark pay, but they’re built for different jobs.

WTW salary surveys are designed for governance: job matching, levelling, and consistent pay structures based on employer-submitted data collected on a cycle.

HR DataHub is designed for speed: live UK market signals that help teams sanity-check salary ranges, set offers, manage pay reviews and hiring surges, and keep up with market movement as it happens.

We’ve compared them across five categories that matter, so if you're evaluating Willis Towers Watson alternatives for UK salary benchmarking you’ll know which is the right tool for your business.

Who should choose what?

Choose WTW if:
‍

• You need survey-backed job matching, grading, and reward frameworks
• A periodic refresh is acceptable
• You mainly benchmark at broad market/industry level
• You have rewards specialists and processes in place
• You want structured survey comparators and stable references

Choose HR DataHub if:
‍

• You need quick context on what the market is advertising for roles you’re hiring
• You want to react to market changes without waiting for the next cycle
• You need location-aware market context for specific roles and levels
• You want self-serve insights that HR teams can use quickly
• You need practical ranges and evidence to support offers and negotiations
  ‍

Essentially, if you need governance (as in formal pay structures with rigid levels and regular audits), start with WTW. If you need fast, self-serve market context for hiring operational roles, mid-management, and niche positions, HR DataHub is the better fit. Large enterprises often benefit from using both.

How have we compared Willis Towers Watson vs HR DataHub?

We've broken down the comparison between WTW and HR DataHub across five categories that matter most to UK HR and Reward teams:
‍

• Data freshness & coverage: how current is the data and what roles/locations does it cover?
• Ease of use & accessibility: can your team use it without specialist reward expertise?
• Customisation & granularity: can you get the specific cuts you need (location, role, seniority)?
• Cost & ROI: what's the investment and what do you get back?
• Integration & reporting: how does it fit into your existing workflows and systems?

How the scores work

Our scores are intended to help guide your decision. They’re not a scientific truth, though we have tried to be as fair and objective as possible.

Here’s what the scores mean:
‍

• 10/10 = best-in-class for most mid-to-large UK employers in that category
• 5/10 = workable, but with meaningful constraints for typical use
• 1/10 = not a realistic fit for that need

For a broader overview, check out our guide to salary surveys.

Willis Towers Watson vs HR DataHub - Detailed comparison

Data freshness & coverage

Willis Towers Watson: 7/10

Why this score: Strong credibility and participation breadth, but annual refresh cycles quickly age the data. Good coverage for established roles, weaker for niche or operational ones.

WTW collects real employee data from a large number of participating companies. You're seeing actual salaries, properly levelled and structured, which makes it defensible in pay reviews and governance.

Sample sizes are typically strong for functional roles like finance, HR, and marketing. Their Rewards Data Intelligence platform bundles multiple surveys across sectors and geographies, so you can get the specific cut you need without buying separate datasets.

The big limitation is refresh frequency. Survey data generally updates once a year. If market conditions shift between cycles, you won't see it until the next collection. For fast-moving markets or emerging roles, the data can feel stale.

HR DataHub: 9/10

Why this score: Daily updates provide current market signals. Excellent breadth for operational and mid-tier roles, though we don't match WTW's depth on senior leadership or complex incentives.

HR DataHub pulls live job advert data daily from across the UK market. You're seeing what employers are advertising right now, not six months ago. This gives you current market movement, particularly useful for hiring decisions or sanity-checking offers quickly.

Coverage is strong for mid-management and below, operational roles, and high-volume hiring sectors like retail, logistics, hospitality, and manufacturing. Because we track job adverts rather than survey catalogues, we pick up niche or emerging roles as soon as they appear.

The trade-off is advertised salary ranges rather than actual employee data. Less suited to formal governance requiring audit-grade evidence, though excellent for calibrating ranges against current market activity.

Verdict

WTW is best for: Annual pay reviews, formal benchmarking governance, senior roles, global pay structures.

HR DataHub is best for: Day-to-day hiring decisions, validating pay ranges,  offer setting, annual pay reviews, operational roles, fast-moving UK markets, roles outside traditional survey catalogues.

If you’re trying to define what competitive actually means for HR teams, read our competitive pay guide to turn “we think we’re competitive” into something you can evidence.

Ease of use & accessibility

Willis Towers Watson (Score: 6/10)

Why this score: Powerful if you know how to use it, but requires specialist knowledge. Not intuitive for non-Reward experts needing quick answers.

WTW's platform is built for reward specialists who understand complex compensation benchmarking. You need to understand their methodology, job matching against catalogues, and how to interpret levelling structures.

If you have a dedicated reward team with survey experience, they'll navigate it comfortably. But for generalist HR professionals who need a quick salary range, the learning curve is steep. The interface can feel corporate and report-heavy, often requiring Excel exports rather than direct platform answers.

This isn't a weakness if you're using it for annual compensation planning with proper reward governance. But it means the tool isn't accessible outside the reward function.

HR DataHub (Score: 9/10)

Why this score: Intuitive from day one. HR generalists without Rewards expertise can use it without training. You get answers in minutes rather than hours or days, and the data you get is easy to understand and communicate back to leadership and hiring managers.

If you've searched for a job online, you already know how to use HR DataHub. Pick a role, filter by location and criteria, and get salary ranges immediately. No training required, no complex methodology to learn.

This makes it accessible to talent acquisition teams and generalist HR professionals. Teams can self-serve rather than waiting for bespoke reports, speeding up decisions and reducing bottlenecks during high-volume hiring or pay reviews.

The simplicity means you're getting market signals rather than governance-grade survey data. If your organisation values formal methodology and audit trails above speed, the straightforward approach might feel lightweight.

Verdict

WTW is best for: Organisations with dedicated reward teams who understand survey methodology and job levelling.

HR DataHub is best for: Busy HR teams without specialist reward support, organisations where multiple people need access to benchmarking.

Customisation & granularity

Willis Towers Watson (Score: 8/10)

Why this score: Excellent for structured benchmarking with formal job matching. Comprehensive catalogues for standard roles, but less flexible for roles outside catalogues or very granular location needs.

WTW's strength is formal job matching and levelling. They've built job catalogues mapping roles to standardised descriptions and seniority levels, enabling like-for-like comparisons across organisations and industries.

You can slice data by industry, company size, and geography. For complex roles, especially senior functional positions, the granularity is strong. This matters for building pay bands or grading structures requiring consistency and defensibility.

The constraint is coverage limits. If your role isn't in their catalogue, or you need very specific location cuts outside survey design, you'll make do with the closest match. Works fine for established roles, less well for niche positions or hyperlocal benchmarking. They also charge a lot more money for specific cuts of data, so the cost can quickly ramp up.

HR DataHub (Score: 8/10)

Why this score: Flexible filtering without catalogue constraints. Strong on granular UK location data. Absence of formal levelling structures is the main limitation.

HR DataHub lets you filter by role title, location, industry, organisation type, and skills without predefined catalogues. If someone's advertising the role, you can benchmark it. Particularly good for niche or emerging roles not yet in traditional survey catalogues.

Location filtering is granular down to town or region level (where data volume supports it), which matters for hiring in specific UK labour markets where pay varies significantly over short distances.

The trade-off is no formal levelling or grading structures built in. You'll use role titles, salary ranges, and context to gauge seniority. Works well for most benchmarking but less suited to building formal pay structures needing explicit level definitions.

Verdict

‍WTW is best for: Building pay bands, grading structures, or benchmarking complex senior roles with formal levelling requirements.

‍HR DataHub is best for: Benchmarking niche or emerging roles, getting hyperlocal salary data, or roles that don't fit traditional catalogues.

Cost & Return on Investment (ROI)

Willis Towers Watson (Score: 6/10)

Why this score: Great value for large, structured reward programmes where governance justifies investment. Less cost-effective for smaller teams or tactical benchmarking.

WTW operates on enterprise pricing that varies by survey participation, datasets needed, geography coverage, and whether you need platform access or consultative outputs. Full implementations can run into six figures, which is feasible for large organisations but overkill for smaller companies.

There's also internal overhead beyond subscription cost. You'll prepare data for submission, handle job matching, and maintain governance processes. Manageable for dedicated reward teams, but it adds up for leaner HR functions.

ROI is strongest when underpinning formal pay structures, grading frameworks, and reward governance needing scrutiny. If you're a 200-person company benchmarking 40 roles quickly, the cost and process don't match the outcome.

HR DataHub (Score: 9/10)

Why this score: Lower cost, transparent pricing, faster time-to-value. The self-serve model means ROI from improved speed and hiring outcomes rather than consultancy costs.

HR DataHub uses subscription pricing. You're paying for platform access rather than consultancy-led delivery, making it easier to budget and roll out across team members without incremental user costs. 

This makes it accessible to all organisation sizes, from 200-person businesses to larger companies wanting a complement to existing survey tools. No participation requirement and minimal internal overhead. Start benchmarking immediately without data prep or job matching.

ROI comes from speed and self-serve access. Benchmark roles on demand, support hiring decisions faster, and refresh salary ranges more frequently than annual survey cycles. Also works well alongside surveys for larger organisations: use surveys to set structure, then HR DataHub to calibrate to current market signals for fast-moving or hard-to-match roles.

Verdict

‍
WTW is best for: Large enterprises with dedicated reward teams and formal job architecture.

‍
HR DataHub is best for: Mid-market and lean teams that prioritise speed, self-serve, and market calibration (alone or alongside surveys).

If you’re comparing tools and want to check the cost upfront, have a look at our pricing page before you invest more time going deeper.

Integration & reporting

Willis Towers Watson (Score: 7/10)

Why this score: Strong reporting and analytics with proper resources. Integration typically requires manual work or consultancy support, fitting structured annual processes better than day-to-day workflows.

WTW's Rewards Data Intelligence platform offers reporting and analytics, though much work still happens through Excel exports. You can generate reports for specific roles or cohorts, slice data across dimensions, and build custom views.

The platform isn't designed for real-time HRIS or ATS integration out of the box. That level of integration typically needs consultative support to embed data into compensation planning, adding both value and cost. For large organisations running structured annual pay reviews, this consultancy often makes sense.

In practice, WTW works well for planned, cyclical processes like annual compensation reviews where you can build reporting into structured timelines. Less suited to ad-hoc, real-time workflows needing instant benchmarking access.

HR DataHub (Score: 8/10)

Why this score: User-friendly for exporting and sharing with minimal workflow friction. Lack of deep system integrations is the main limitation for organisations wanting fully automated data flows.

HR DataHub is designed for self-service. Benchmark a role, export salary data, and share insights with hiring managers without IT support or consultancy. This makes it practical to embed benchmarking into day-to-day hiring and pay review workflows.

It works well standalone or complementing existing HRIS systems. While we don't currently offer deep API integrations pulling data directly into other platforms, the ease of exporting and sharing means you can slot it into existing processes without technical overhead.

For teams making frequent hiring decisions or running ongoing pay reviews, this self-serve model removes bottlenecks. HR teams get answers when needed rather than waiting for formal reports.

Verdict

WTW is best for: Annual compensation planning cycles, formal pay reviews, organisations with resources for consultancy-led integration.

HR DataHub is best for: Ongoing hiring workflows, real-time market insights, teams that need quick exports and sharing without IT involvement, pay reviews, and hiring surges.

If you’re trying to formalise how market data feeds into salary decisions, read our salary review process guide for a practical workflow you can replicate.

Final verdict: should you choose Willis Towers Watson or HR DataHub?

If you need governance-grade benchmarking like job matching, levelling, and pay structures you can stand behind in annual reviews, then WTW may provide a better foundation.

If you need fast, practical UK market context for hiring and day-to-day pay decisions, especially for operational, mid-management, niche, or fast-moving roles, HR DataHub is the better fit.

If you’re a large organisation, the best answer is often both. Use WTW to set the structure, then use HR DataHub to calibrate ranges and fill gaps where survey catalogues can lag.

For more details on how to set the right pay structure for your business, read our guide here.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better for UK salary benchmarking: Willis Towers Watson or HR DataHub?

It depends on your organisation's size, reward maturity, and how you use benchmarking. WTW is stronger for large enterprises with complex pay structures and dedicated reward teams. HR DataHub is better for mid-market companies (200–1,000 employees), lean HR teams, and organisations that need fast, accessible UK market data.

If the core question is “which approach fits our team size and reward maturity?”, take our pay maturity quiz to pressure-test the decision quickly.

What's the difference between WTW salary survey data and real-time salary benchmarking?

WTW uses traditional pay surveys: they collect actual employee salary data from participating companies once a year. That data is aggregated, levelled, and presented back through reports. It's credible and structured but refreshes annually. HR DataHub pulls job advert data daily from the live UK market, showing what employers are advertising right now.

When should you choose WTW instead of HR DataHub (and vice versa)?

Choose WTW if:
‍

• You need formal survey governance for global pay programmes
• You're building complex grading and levelling structures
• You have a dedicated reward team with survey expertise
• You need comprehensive data on senior roles and incentive structures

Choose HR DataHub if:
‍

• You need current UK market data for frequent pay decisions
• You want an intuitive tool that doesn't require reward specialist knowledge
• You're benchmarking operational or mid-tier roles
• You need granular location filtering and accessible pricing

See how HR DataHub works

HR DataHub gives you live UK salary data updated daily. Whether you're setting offers, planning pay reviews, or need to benchmark salaries for a specific role, the platform is built to give you answers quickly. Have a chat with our team to book a demo or start a free trial today.

‍