Papershift vs TimeTac

Papershift

App, browser and a tablet-based terminal are all offered, offline use is claimed with real-time cloud sync, and employees identify by PIN or signature, edit their own records and have them approved online. The stationary terminal is a tablet setup rather than vendor hardware or badge readers, the GPS geofencing claim states no limits, and the change history that would make corrections attributable sits in the Professional plan — we found no public information on bulk correction.

TimeTac

Four capture paths are real — web, offline-capable iOS/Android apps with GPS/NFC, and three named RFID/fingerprint terminals at published prices — and corrections are a self-service workflow with optional supervisor approval, not an admin task. But the evidence never says a terminal works offline, never states the limits of GPS positioning, and shows no bulk correction or audit trail of who changed what, which is what separates this from an 8.

Papershift

The vendor names the 2022 Federal Labour Court decision and claims start, end and pauses are documented revision-secure, with employee-specific break rules and a change history in the Professional plan. We found no public information on daily maximum-hour or rest-period checks, the deletion clause names no retention period, and the lexicon working-time article is a generic definition rather than a mapping of features to the working-hours statute.

TimeTac

The compliance claim is naked: 'rechtskonform' to EuGH and BAG with not one feature named to make it true — no configurable break rules, no 8/10-hour or 11-hour rest checks, no retention period, no change history anywhere in the evidence. 'Rechtssicher Arbeits- und Pausenzeit erfassen' is capture, not enforcement; working time models with Sollstunden and Zuschlagssätzen are payroll scaffolding, not ArbZG checks.

Papershift

Leave entitlement, residual leave and carry-over are calculated automatically, sickness and other absences run through approval paths and a team calendar, and absences feed directly into shift planning with automatic schedule adjustment. Digital shift planning, employee-specific public holidays and automatic scheduling sit in the Professional or Premium plans, and we found no public information on pro-rata entitlement, substitution or swap workflows, or rest-period checks when a roster is published.

TimeTac

The leave module genuinely earns its keep — automatic saldo calculation, carry-over or expiry, sickness, deputies and international holiday templates. But there is no rostering anywhere in the three named modules, and the deputy rules forward requests during absence rather than substituting shifts — the planning half of this criterion simply does not exist in the evidence.

Papershift

Project times can be assigned to an employee, an order or a customer, carry tags and notes, feed individual reports, and a tasks add-in and a sevdesk connector exist in the marketplace. We found no public information on a billable flag, rate cards by role or project, budget tracking with warnings, or an invoice-ready export — the per-person hourly wage shown is a payroll setting rather than project billing.

TimeTac

Project time is a first-class module with order and project booking, access rights and per-project reports in real time, which clears the single-field floor. But the evidence is silent on billable flags, rates, cost centres, budgets and any invoice or accounting handoff — the recorded time stops at the report and never becomes revenue.

Papershift

DATEV is a named integration with a "DATEV Detail" export to the tax office, LODAS and SAGE are further named formats, and night, Sunday and holiday surcharges are calculated with payrolls generated automatically at a chosen cutoff date plus a red warning when time or absence data arrives after generation. The DATEV and LODAS export and the individual surcharge wage types are Professional-plan features with payroll priced separately per employee, and we found no public information on a lock or approval step before transmission or on retroactive correction after the close.

TimeTac

A named, vendor-run DATEV transfer 'ganz ohne manuellen Export' clears the named-system bar, with Excel/PDF/CSV and an API as fallback. What the evidence never shows is what actually travels — hours, absences, overtime, surcharges are all unspecified — nor any lock or approval step before transmission.

Papershift

The contracting entity is verifiably German — Karlsruhe address, Mannheim commercial register, German VAT identification — and a public processing register plus downloadable agreement annexes for subcontractors and technical measures exist. EU hosting appears as a pricing-page bullet with no server location, data-centre provider or certification named, and the subcontractor names sit behind a download annex rather than a published list; we found no public information on the composition of the subprocessor chain or on any on-premises option.

TimeTac

The Austrian entity checks out — register court, number and VAT in Graz — with EU-only hosting, German primary region and ISO 27001 certification. But the data-centre operator is never named, ownership is unknown, and no subprocessor list exists in the evidence; 'further server locations in EU countries' is marketing copy, not documentation, and there is no on-premises escape hatch.

Papershift

Three plan prices, a stated 39,00 € per month base fee plus VAT, a 10 % annual-payment discount, a starting price of 3,50 EUR per employee and month, and payroll priced separately at 4 € monthly or 3 € annually per employee give a buyer most of the annual invoice. Marketplace add-ons such as the reports module and the full-service payroll carry no published price, terminal hardware is unpriced, and we found no public information on a minimum term or on what seat quantity the plan prices assume.

TimeTac

The pricing page does per-user, per-product maths with monthly and annual totals, states net pricing, and puts real numbers on all three Evo terminals. But minimum contract term is never stated, and the API, onboarding and — critically — the DATEV interface are all 'price on request': a buyer can price the seats and the clocks, not the complete annual invoice.