Papershift vs TimeTac

Papershift

App, browser and a shared tablet terminal with offline capture that syncs to the cloud, plus GPS geofencing and signature or PIN identification, cover desk, field and shift crews, and employees edit their own punches with admin approval on top. The geofencing page never states its limits, and we found no public information on bulk corrections or dedicated hardware badge readers.

TimeTac

Web, mobile with a real offline mode ('auch offline ohne Netz'), and hardware terminals with RFID/fingerprint auth — that covers my desk staff and my field consultants. Employees self-correct bookings with optional supervisor approval, but the evidence shows no bulk correction, no audit trail of who changed what, and GPS positioning without stated limits, so it stops short of rubric level 8.

Papershift

Revision-secure documentation of start, end and pauses with per-employee break rules and a change history on the top plan clears the recording-duty floor that the vendor itself ties to the 2022 labour court ruling. We found no public information on warnings for the eight and ten-hour daily maxima or the eleven-hour rest period, no stated retention period for the working-time record, and no export built for an inspection — the floor, not the product.

TimeTac

The vendor claims BAG/EuGH recording-duty compliance and 'rechtssicher Arbeits- und Pausenzeit' with working-time models carrying target hours and surcharges — but that is assertion, not modelling: no daily-maximum or 11-hour rest checks, no retention statement, no inspection-built export anywhere in the evidence. Compliance is my floor, and this floor is a marketing claim.

Papershift

Automatic entitlement, carry-over and sickness recording, an absence calendar, and shift planning that absences feed into directly, with automatic shift assignment, employee-specific holidays and qualification tags pushing past the basics. We found no public information on pro-rata entitlement or rest-period checks in the roster, and substitution goes only as far as backup-staff planning language.

TimeTac

The absence half is solid: automatic vacation balance, reliable carry-over or expiry, sickness (Krankenstand), international holiday templates and deputy forwarding. But there is not one word about a shift roster, qualification checks, swaps or coverage — rubric level 5 requires basic shift planning, and the planning half of this criterion simply does not exist in the evidence.

Papershift

Project times can be assigned to employee, order and customer with tags, notes and a tasks add-in — the skeleton of what I bill against, but only that. We found no public information on a billable flag, client rate cards, budget warnings or an invoice-ready export; sevdesk appears as a named integration with nothing stated about what time data flows into it.

TimeTac

A genuine Project Time module — order and project times, access rights, real-time project status, project reports — but no rate card by person/role/project, no billable flag, no budget tracking or warnings, and no invoice-ready export in the entire sheet. For me that means recorded time does not become revenue without re-entry, which is exactly the gap I live on.

Papershift

DATEV named repeatedly with a detail export to the tax office, LODAS and SAGE in the format list, automatic payroll generation at a chosen cutoff, and automatic night, Sunday and holiday surcharges including short-time work and construction pay — a real handoff, not a retyped spreadsheet. A red warning triangle flags time or absence data created after payroll generation, but we found no public information on a formal lock step before transmission or corrections after the close.

TimeTac

A named DATEV payroll interface with direct, GDPR-conform transfer 'ganz ohne manuellen Export oder Excel-Workarounds', and surcharge rates (Zuschlagssätze) configurable in the working-time models — better than a generic CSV. But nothing evidences surcharges actually flowing into the export, a lock step before transmission, or retro handling after close, so it sits below rubric level 8.

Papershift

A German contracting entity with register court and VAT ID on the imprint, EU hosting stated as a pricing-page bullet, and downloadable DPA annexes covering subcontractors and technical measures alongside a public processing register. The subprocessor chain stays behind a download rather than published, no data-centre provider is named, and the privacy page states no server location.

TimeTac

Austrian GmbH with Graz register court, VAT number and chamber entry, EU-only hosting with the primary server in Germany in ISO-certified data centres, plus ISO 27001 — comfortably DACH for my clients. But no data-centre provider is named, no subprocessor list is published, and ownership is unknown, so it cannot reach the anchor-8 bar of a named provider and a full published chain.

Papershift

Three tiers priced monthly and annually with the billing period stated, a stated base fee plus VAT, and payroll at stated per-employee rates — most of the annual invoice is computable from public pages. The captured pages give different figures for the per-employee entry point and the tier prices, marketplace add-ons carry no numbers, and we found no public information on minimum terms.

TimeTac

Per-user, per-product pricing with a configurator that sums the monthly invoice (€19.50/month shown, €234/year, explicitly net), terminals priced monthly from €29.90, mobile apps and support included — I can nearly compute my annual bill from public pages. The gaps are the unstated minimum term and the onboarding service and API being 'price on request', which keeps it short of rubric level 8.