Absence Management
clockin
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by clockin GmbH · www.clockin.de
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
clockin at a glance
- Vendor
- clockin GmbH
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Starting price
- “ab 3,59 €” (vendor’s words) source, captured 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates clockin 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. clockin is time tracking with absence management from clockin GmbH, marketed as "Made in Germany" to field and trade businesses. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Oct 2026 to 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
clockin is time tracking with absence management from clockin GmbH, marketed as "Made in Germany" to field and trade businesses. Its strongest criterion is payroll handover, scored 6 at both the top and bottom of the range: work times and absences transfer automatically to the DATEV Rechenzentrum for both DATEV Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS, payslips and SV certificates flow back to employees, and master data synchronises both ways. Requests and approvals scored 5-6, crediting deputy naming with a conflict check and a calendar that keeps absence reasons anonymous by default. Weakest is sick leave and the electronic certificate of incapacity, which topped out at 2: judges found no public information on eAU retrieval, certificate handling or child sick days, while confirming correct § 3 EFZG handling. Leave policies split from 2 to 4, the lower scores stressing that mid-year entitlement changes are calculated by the user. Sovereignty scored 2-3 — hosting location and subprocessors undocumented — and pricing transparency scored 3, with "ab 3,59 €" carrying no stated basis.
Speaks for it
- Payroll handover scored 6, with work times and absences transferring automatically to the DATEV Rechenzentrum and digital payslips returning to employees' phones.
- Requests and approvals scored 5-6, with a named deputy on each request, a rule blocking an already-absent deputy, and automatic email to deputy and supervisor.
- The default calendar permission shows colleagues only as absent, with the reason anonymous and visibility scoped per department.
- Hourly leave accounting can be enabled, deducted pro rata against each employee's stored target working hours.
- Sickness with continued pay follows the § 3 EFZG calendar principle across weekends, and the no-continued-pay type zeroes target hours so no negative balances build.
Held against it
- Sick leave and the electronic certificate of incapacity scored 2, and we found no public information on eAU retrieval, certificate handling or child sick days.
- Leave policies scored 2-4, with mid-year entitlement changes calculated by the user and entered manually, and no public information on carry-over expiry, public holidays per federal state, or special and parental leave types.
- Pricing transparency scored 3: "ab 3,59 €" appears without a stated basis, and the named optional services are listed without prices, so the annual invoice is not computable.
- Sovereignty scored 2-3, and we found no public information on hosting location, subprocessors or certification behind the "Made in Germany" claims.
- Absence data protection scored 4: the permission that reveals reasons also grants processing of requests, and we found no public information on retention settings for absence records, access logging of health data, or a data processing agreement.
Best for
- You run DATEV Lohn und Gehalt or LODAS and want work times and absences to reach your payroll office automatically, with digital payslips returned to employees.
- Your team manages absences from phones and needs named deputies, reminders and a calendar that keeps reasons anonymous by default.
- You account for leave in hours rather than days, especially for part-time staff with varying target working hours.
- You run a field or trade business and want absences recorded in the same system as time tracking, feeding the timesheet handed to payroll and the health insurer.
Avoid if
- You need the electronic certificate of incapacity flow in place before signing — sick leave and the eAU scored 2 and we found no public information on retrieval.
- You expect entitlements to prorate automatically at mid-year contract changes, joiners or leavers — the help pages tell the admin to calculate the new entitlement.
- You must verify hosting location and a subprocessor list during procurement — sovereignty scored 2-3 and the captured pages carry only "Made in Germany" claims.
- You need a computable annual invoice up front — only "ab 3,59 €" is public, with no tier prices or tier contents.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Entitlements & German leave rules | 2 of 5 |
| Requests, approvals & team calendar | 3 of 5 |
| Sick leave, eAU & continued pay | 1 of 5 |
| Payroll handover, time tracking & API | 3 of 5 |
| Health data, access & works council | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 1.5 of 5 |
Entitlements & German leave rules
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the tool computes leave the way German and Austrian law and contracts do: entitlements per contract and working-time model, part-time proration, carry-over and expiry with the required notice, public holidays per federal state, half days and hourly leave, and special leave types.
0 — A fixed number of days per person typed in by hand; no carry-over, no proration and no public holidays.
3 — Annual entitlements and national public holidays, with carry-over as a manual adjustment and no statement on part-time or regional holidays.
5 — Entitlements per employee with automatic proration for joiners, leavers and part-time working days, public holidays per German federal state or Austrian region, half days, configurable carry-over with an expiry date, and custom leave types.
8 — Several working-time models per employee with changes over time recalculated, hourly leave, carry-over expiry with automatic notices to employees before leave lapses, special leave and parental leave types with their own rules, and entitlement changes logged.
10 — Leave law modelled and documented: entitlement rules per contract or collective agreement, statutory minimum and contractual leave kept apart where they expire differently, balances recalculated retroactively with an audit trail, and the rules a tool applies published in its help centre.
The Team Lead
Annual leave is a number an admin types into each employee's contract data for the current and next year, and when someone switches between part-time and full-time the help centre tells you to calculate the new entitlement yourself and adjust it manually. Hourly leave accounting can be switched on and is deducted against stored target hours per day, which suits my part-timers, but we found no public information on carry-over and expiry, public holidays per federal state, or automatic proration for joiners and leavers. 6 6 7
The Managing Director
The annual entitlement is a number I type into each employee's contract data for the current and next year, and when someone switches from part-time to full-time the help pages tell me to calculate the new claim myself and enter it. Hourly leave is properly supported, deducted pro-rata from the stored target hours per day, but I found no public information on public holidays per federal state, automatic proration for joiners and leavers, or carry-over with expiry and notice — the three things I am personally liable for getting right. 3 6 6 7
The Payroll Accountant
Contractual annual leave is typed in per employee under the contract data for the current and coming year, and when something changes mid-year — say part-time to full-time — the page tells the admin to calculate the new entitlement themselves, so proration is manual. Hourly leave on stored target hours and individual absence reasons are documented. We found no public information on public holidays per federal state, carry-over rules with expiry, or statutory versus contractual leave kept apart. 6 6 7 3
The Data Protection Officer
Contractual annual leave is typed in per employee for the current and the coming year, hourly accounting can be enabled with deductions made on the stored target working time per day, and a mid-year change such as part-time to full-time is calculated by the user and entered manually. We found no public information on carry-over and its expiry, public holidays per federal state, part-time proration, or special and parental leave types. 6 7 6 7
The HR IT Integrator
Contractual annual leave is stored per employee for the current and the coming year, mid-year changes such as part-time to full-time are calculated by the user and entered by hand rather than prorated automatically, and hourly accounting on the stored target working hours can be switched on. We found no public information on public holidays per federal state, carry-over with expiry, or special and parental leave types. 6 6 7
The Skeptic
Entitlement is contractual days typed in per employee for the current and next year, and the help centre has the user compute mid-year changes themselves after a part-time switch — no automatic proration is evidenced. Hourly leave deducted pro rata from stored target hours is genuinely computed, but I found no public information on public holidays per federal state, carry-over expiry, half days or special leave types. 6 7 6
Requests, approvals & team calendar
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The everyday flow: an employee requests leave on a phone, the right person approves, a substitute is named, and the team can plan around it — judged on configurable approval chains and on what colleagues are allowed to see.
0 — Leave requested by email or in a shared calendar; no approval step and no record of who approved.
3 — Requests with a single approver and a team calendar, but no substitutes, no blocking rules and every absence reason visible to everyone.
5 — Mobile requests and approvals, approvers per team or department, substitutes named on the request, a team calendar that shows absence without the reason, email or push notifications, and calendar sync.
8 — Multi-level approval chains, minimum staffing rules or blackout periods, delegation while the approver is away, configurable calendar visibility per role, Microsoft Teams or Slack integration, and every request, approval and cancellation logged.
10 — Approval logic that matches a real organisation: rules per location, team and leave type, conflicts checked against staffing and shift plans before approval, a complete history per request, and reporting on pending and overdue approvals.
The Team Lead
This is the flow I live in, and the basics are all there: requests and approvals in the app, a named deputy on every request with automatic email to the deputy and the supervisor, a reminder after so many days of absence when no deputy was picked, and a deputy who is away at the same time cannot even be selected. The team calendar shows a colleague only as 'absent' with the reason kept anonymous, visibility can be scoped per department, and calendar synchronisation is documented. We found no public information on minimum-staffing warnings or blackout periods before approval, multi-level approval chains, or a logged approval history. 3 8 9 8
The Managing Director
Requests and approvals run through the app, the deputy feature is genuinely thought through — named on the request, refused if the deputy is already absent at the same time, with reminders after a configurable number of days and automatic email to deputy and supervisor — and by default the calendar shows colleagues only as "absent" with the reason anonymous. I found no public information on multi-level approval chains, minimum staffing or blackout rules, or a log of who approved what and when. 3 8 9 8
The Payroll Accountant
Requests and approvals run from the phone, and the deputy handling is properly thought through: a deputy is named on the request, a colleague already absent at the same time cannot be selected, deputy and supervisor get an automatic email, and after how many days the reminder to pick a deputy fires is configurable. The calendar shows colleagues only 'absent' with the reason anonymous unless a separate permission opens it, and department access scoping is settable. We found no public information on multi-level approvals, staffing or blackout rules, or a logged history of who approved what. 3 9 8
The Data Protection Officer
Requests and approvals run in the app, a deputy can be named on the request with a conflict check and automatic email notice to deputy and supervisor, and the team calendar shows colleagues only as absent, with the reason anonymous unless a separate permission is granted and department access limiting whose absences appear. We found no public information on multi-level approval chains, staffing or blackout rules, Microsoft Teams or Slack integration, or a log of who approved what. 3 8 9 8
The HR IT Integrator
Requests and approvals run via app with a team calendar that keeps the reason anonymous under the standard permission, and visibility is scoped per department and assignable through predefined roles. Deputies can be named on the request with an automatic email notification, a reminder after a configurable number of days, and a rule blocking a deputy who is already absent at the same time; we found no public information on multi-level approval chains, staffing or blackout rules, or a logged history of each approval, and calendar synchronisation appears only as a help-article title. 3 8 9 8
The Skeptic
Requests and approvals run in the mobile app, deputies are named on the request with a conflict check and an automatic email to the supervisor, and the default calendar view shows colleagues only as 'abwesend' with the reason anonymous and department-level scoping of who sees whom. I found no public information on multi-level approval chains, minimum staffing or blackout rules, or a log of who approved what. 3 8 9
Sick leave, eAU & continued pay
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Sick notifications and the German electronic certificate of incapacity: whether the tool retrieves the eAU from the health insurer itself or through a named payroll system, how sick days are counted towards the six-week continued-pay and BEM thresholds, and how child-sick days and certificates from private insurance are handled.
0 — Sickness recorded as another leave type with no word on the eAU, certificates or thresholds.
3 — A sick-leave type with a document upload, and "eAU" mentioned without saying who retrieves it or how.
5 — Sick notification by the employee in the app, the eAU retrieval process documented — by the tool itself or via a named payroll system — with the retrieval status visible to HR, and child-sick days as a separate type.
8 — eAU retrieval from the statutory health insurers documented end to end with the certified software named, retrieval results written back to the absence, sick days counted towards the six-week continued-pay limit per illness, BEM thresholds flagged to HR only, and paper certificates for privately insured employees handled.
10 — Sick leave handled as the regulated process it is: eAU retrieval automated with error and follow-up handling, continued-pay and sickness-benefit transitions tracked, BEM invitation workflow supported, reasons and documents restricted to named roles, and the whole process documented in the help centre.
The Team Lead
The help centre shows the tool applies the continued-pay calendar principle, counting sickness across weekends per the law, and there is a separate illness-without-continued-pay type that zeroes target hours so nobody builds negative hours, with the six-week transition to sick pay explained. We found no public information on the electronic certificate of incapacity — nothing on retrieval from health insurers or via a payroll system — and nothing on certificates, child-sick days, or privately insured employees. 10 10 11
The Managing Director
Sickness with continued pay follows the § 3 EFZG calendar principle correctly across weekends, actual hours are only filled on planned working days, unpaid sickness zeroes the target hours so nobody builds negative balances, and the help centre explains that continued pay ends after six weeks with the transition to sickness benefit. But I found no public information on the eAU at all — not who retrieves it nor whether retrieval exists — nor on certificates, child sick days or BEM, which for a forty-person shop without HR means phoning health insurers. 10 11 10 11
The Payroll Accountant
The EFZG side is handled correctly for payroll: sick leave with continued pay counts all calendar days including weekends per § 3 EFZG, actual hours fill only scheduled working days, and the 'Krankheit ohne Lohnfortzahlung' type zeroes the target hours with the six-week transition to sick pay documented as the trigger. Beyond that we found no public information on eAU retrieval, certificate upload, child-sick days or BEM, and nothing on whether the six weeks are counted per illness by the tool. 11 11 10 10
The Data Protection Officer
Sickness is handled as absence types, and the help centre correctly explains the calendar principle under section 3 of the Entgeltfortzahlungsgesetz, fills actual hours only on scheduled working days, sets target hours to zero for illness without continued pay, and describes the six-week transition to sick pay. We found no public information on the eAU, on certificate upload or retrieval, on child-sick days, or on sickness reasons and documents being restricted to named roles — which is where my concern begins. 10 11 10 11
The HR IT Integrator
Sickness with continued pay follows the § 3 EFZG calendar principle including weekends, actual hours fill only scheduled working days, and a separate sickness-without-continued-pay type zeroes the target hours with the six-week transition to sick pay explained. We found no public information on eAU retrieval by the tool or through a payroll system, on certificates, child sick days or BEM — for me that is the decisive gap, since I need the eAU flow wired one way or the other. 11 10
The Skeptic
The sick types are legally literate — the § 3 EFZG calendar principle counting weekends, ist-hours filled only on scheduled working days, and a no-continued-pay type whose documented triggers include the six-week sick-benefit transition. But I found no public information on the eAU, who retrieves it, certificate handling or child-sick days, which is the centrepiece of the regulated process. 10 10 11
Payroll handover, time tracking & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting absences into the payroll run with the right codes and keeping balances consistent with time tracking: exports or integrations for the payroll systems German companies use, time-account interaction, and an API.
0 — No export beyond a screen list; absences are retyped into payroll.
3 — A CSV or Excel export of absences per month, with no named payroll system and no API.
5 — A documented export or integration for DATEV (LODAS or Lohn und Gehalt) or another named German payroll system, absence types mapped to payroll codes, and a documented API.
8 — Several named payroll integrations, absence and overtime balances shared with time tracking, configurable payroll codes per leave type, monthly closing that locks past periods, webhooks, and an API with published limits.
10 — Payroll handover that closes the month: absences, sick days and eAU results delivered to payroll in its own format with corrections flagged, a period lock with an audit trail, a versioned API with a deprecation policy, and the full absence history exportable at contract end.
The Team Lead
Work times and absences transfer automatically to the DATEV data centre, both DATEV Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS are named, a two-way master data service and digital payslips come with it, and a CSV import is documented besides. Because time tracking is the product's core, absences write straight into the target and actual hours of the same account, and the timesheet is treated as the legally relevant document handed to payroll and the health insurer. We found no public information on mapping absence types to payroll codes, a monthly period lock, webhooks, or published API limits. 11 12 11
The Managing Director
Work times and absences transfer automatically to the DATEV data centre, for both DATEV Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS, across three data services that also return payslips and SV certificates to employees and sync master data in both directions, with a partner portal for my tax advisor. Absences clearly live in the same accounts as time tracking; I found no public information on configurable payroll codes per leave type, a monthly period lock, webhooks or published API limits, and the API is evidenced only by a support FAQ page. 12 13 10
The Payroll Accountant
The DATEV handover is the strongest evidence in the package: three data services carry work times and absences automatically into the DATEV Rechenzentrum for both DATEV Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS, payslips and SV-Nachweise come back to the employee's phone, master data synchronises both ways, and a partner portal connects the tax advisor. An API FAQ page exists in the support centre. We found no public information on mapping absence types to payroll codes, a monthly period lock once a month is paid, corrections flagging, webhooks or published API limits. 12 13
The Data Protection Officer
Three DATEV data services carry work times and absences automatically to the DATEV data centre, return payslips and social-insurance proofs into clockin, and synchronise employee master data in both directions, supporting DATEV Lohn und Gehalt as well as LODAS, with a partner portal for tax advisors; the support centre also lists API frequently-asked questions. We found no public information on mapping absence types to payroll codes, a monthly period lock, webhooks, or published API limits. 11 12 13
The HR IT Integrator
The DATEV connector is maintained and named down to the programs — DATEV Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS — with automatic transfer of work times and absences to the DATEV Rechenzentrum, payslips and SV-Nachweise flowing back, and a two-way master-data sync; because clockin is itself the time tracker, absence and time balances live in one system. A support article titled "API frequently asked questions" exists, but we found no public information on published API documentation or limits, webhooks, payroll codes per leave type, or a monthly period lock. 12 13
The Skeptic
The DATEV link looks like the real thing: work times and absences transfer automatically to the DATEV Rechenzentrum, both Lohn und Gehalt and LODAS are named, payslips and SV certificates flow back to the employee's phone, and master data syncs both ways, with the timesheet framed as the document for payroll and the health insurer. I found no public information on payroll code mapping per leave type, period locking or webhooks, and beyond an FAQ page I found no published detail on the API. 11 12 13
Health data, access & works council
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the tool does with data that is health data in law: who can see a sickness reason or certificate, how long absence records are kept, whether access is logged, and whether the vendor documents what a works agreement on absence recording needs.
0 — Nothing stated about who sees sick data or how long absences are kept.
3 — Roles for employees, managers and admins, but sickness reasons and documents visible to managers by default, and no retention setting.
5 — Sick-leave reasons and certificates restricted to HR by configurable permissions, colleagues see only "absent", retention or deletion of absence records configurable, and a DPA available.
8 — Field-level permissions per leave type, access to health-related records logged, retention rules per record type with automatic deletion, employees able to see their own records, and documentation aimed at works councils or a works agreement.
10 — Health data governed and evidenced: Art. 9 GDPR processing explained per feature, deletion runs logged and reportable, audit logs exportable, no analytics or AI features run on sickness data without explicit configuration, and the vendor publishing a template or checklist for the works agreement.
The Team Lead
The standard calendar permission shows colleagues only 'absent' while the reason stays anonymous, and seeing an absence reason requires a permission that comes bundled with the right to process requests, with per-employee permissions in five areas and department restrictions available. We found no public information on a data processing agreement, configurable retention for absence records beyond a general delete-when-no-longer-needed principle, access logging of sickness data, or documentation aimed at a works council. 4 8 14 8
The Managing Director
By default colleagues see only that someone is "abwesend" with the reason anonymous, and seeing reasons requires a separate permission — though that same permission also lets the holder process absence requests, coupling visibility to power I may not want to hand out. Permissions are granular per employee with predefined roles and department scoping, but I found no public information on configurable retention for absence records, logging of access to sickness data, a data processing agreement, or anything aimed at a works council. 4 8 14
The Payroll Accountant
Colleagues see only 'Abwesend' with the reason anonymous, and viewing reasons needs a separate permission — which also unlocks processing the requests, coarser than restricting the data to HR alone. Deletion is stated as a general principle of removing data when no longer necessary, and we found no public information on a configurable retention period for absence records, access logging to health-related records, a DPA, or material for a works agreement. The privacy policy names AI features including chatbots, text recognition and automated evaluations, with no public information on whether any of them touch sickness data. 8 4 14
The Data Protection Officer
The standard calendar permission shows colleagues only as absent with the reason anonymous, seeing any reason at all requires a separate employee-absence permission that simultaneously grants processing of requests, and department access narrows whose absences are visible — a decent default, but nothing like field-level control per leave type. We found no public information on configurable retention or automatic deletion of absence records, on access logging for health-related data, on a data-processing agreement, or on guidance for works councils; the privacy policy states only a general deletion principle, and AI features are advertised with no statement on whether they touch sickness data. 3 4 8 14
The HR IT Integrator
Colleagues see only that someone is absent with the reason anonymous under the standard calendar permission, and viewing reasons requires a separate permission that can be scoped per employee, role and department. The privacy policy states only the general principle that personal data is deleted when no longer necessary, and we found no public information on configurable retention, logged access to health records, a data processing agreement, or works-council documentation; AI features are named without any statement on sickness data. 4 8 14
The Skeptic
Permissions are granular — per employee and via predefined roles, with department scoping — and absence reasons need a separate permission that also grants request processing, while the default calendar keeps reasons anonymous. Retention appears only as a general principle of deleting data when no longer necessary, and I found no public information on retention settings for absence records, access logs on health data, a data processing agreement or anything aimed at a works council; AI features including automated evaluations are described with no statement on whether they touch sickness data. 4 8 14
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where absence and sickness data lives, who the contracting entity is, and who the subprocessors are — including email, push-notification and support providers. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, and subprocessors unnamed.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — email, push notifications, analytics or support — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published with locations, and a DPA that covers sickness data as special-category processing.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, and certification published.
The Team Lead
The pages claim '100 % Made in Germany' and the copyright names clockin GmbH, but the independently sourced data could not confirm hosting location or ownership, and we found no public information on subprocessors, including who delivers the emails, push notifications and support tickets. Without a published subprocessor list with locations, the origin claims remain marketing rather than something I can check. 1 11
The Managing Director
The pages repeat "100 % Made in Germany" and the copyright names clockin GmbH, but I found no public information confirming where absence and sickness data is hosted, who the subprocessors are — email, push notifications, support — or the contracting entity's jurisdiction on the captured pages. A marketing slogan is not a hosting agreement. 1 4 14
The Payroll Accountant
The contracting entity appears as clockin GmbH and the pages carry '100% Made in Germany' claims, but the captured pages confirm neither where absence and sickness data is hosted nor on which infrastructure. We found no public information on subprocessors or their locations, and no certification or DPA evidence covering sickness data as special-category processing. 8 1 14
The Data Protection Officer
Every captured page proclaims "100% Made in Germany" and the copyright names clockin GmbH, but we found no public information on where absence and sickness data is actually hosted, on the contracting entity's seat, or on a single subprocessor — including who delivers the push notification that says someone is ill. As far as I am concerned, Made in Germany is a slogan until a hosting location and a subprocessor list with locations are published. 1 4 11
The HR IT Integrator
clockin GmbH is the entity named on the pages and a "100 % Made in Germany" claim sits next to a DSGVO mention, but hosting is not described beyond that marketing claim. We found no public information on where absence and sickness data is hosted, on subprocessors including email, push and support providers, or on certification. 1 11
The Skeptic
The vendor is a German GmbH and markets 'Made in Germany' and 'DSGVO', but those are origin and compliance claims, not hosting statements — I found no public information on where absence and sickness data is hosted, who the subprocessors for email, push and support are, or any certification. The chain is unevidenced beyond the entity itself. 1 4 14
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per employee or per user, which features (eAU, payroll export, time tracking) sit in which tier, minimum users and the minimum term.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A starting price exists, but the pricing basis or which features it covers is unstated — the invoice is unknowable.
5 — Tier prices public with the pricing basis given, but at least one commonly needed piece (eAU, payroll export, time tracking, extra admins) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its basis, add-on prices listed, minimum users, minimum term and VAT treatment given.
10 — Complete price computability: the annual invoice derivable for a given headcount and feature set, with every add-on, setup fee and overage published.
The Team Lead
The homepage advertises 'ab 3,59 €' without stating the pricing basis, and the pricing page names paid extras like setup service, admin training and premium support but shows no price for any of them. We found no public information on tier contents, minimum users, minimum term or VAT treatment, so the annual invoice cannot be worked out from public pages alone. 1 2
The Managing Director
The footer quotes "ab 3,59 €" and the pricing page names optional services — setup service, trainings, two support tiers — without prices, while the homepage routes me to a consultation call to find the package that fits my business. I found no public information on the pricing basis, which features sit in which tier, minimum term or VAT treatment, so the annual invoice is not computable from the public pages alone. 1 2
The Payroll Accountant
The public pages show 'ab 3,59 €' without stating the basis — per user or per month — or which package and features it covers, so the annual invoice cannot be computed. Packages are term-based to the extent that upgrades apply immediately and downgrades only after the current term ends, and the named paid services — Einrichtungsservice, Admin-Schulung, Team-Schulung, Expertencheck, Pro Support, Premium Support — are listed without prices. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The homepage states "DSGVO ab 3,59 €" and the pricing page names optional services such as Einrichtungsservice, Admin-Schulung, Pro Support and Premium Support together with upgrade and downgrade rules, but we found no public information on the pricing basis, on what the starting price covers, on tier contents, minimum users, minimum term or VAT treatment. A buyer cannot compute the annual invoice from the captured pages. 1 2
The HR IT Integrator
The only public price is "DSGVO ab 3,59 €" with no pricing basis stated, and the pricing page shows optional services such as setup, trainings and support tiers plus upgrade and downgrade mechanics. We found no public information on tier prices, which features sit in which tier, minimum users, term length or VAT treatment, so the annual invoice is not computable. 1 2
The Skeptic
A starting price of 'ab 3,59 €' appears in the footer with no statement of its basis, and the captured pricing page names add-on services (setup service, trainings, premium support) and an upgrade policy without tier prices or feature assignment. A buyer cannot compute the annual invoice from what is public. 1 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about clockin
Is clockin European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies clockin as EU-Made.
Where does clockin store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does clockin have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to clockin?
As of 15 Oct 2026, the panel rates Kenjo (3/5), flair (2.5/5) and HRlab (2.5/5) highest among the other 16 Absence Management products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Kenjo (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: clockin alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Legal entity, Subprocessors. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 41 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 12 subprocessors facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 10 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (15)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Absence feature www.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy www.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Legal notice www.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Requests, approvals & team calendar — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Requests, approvals & team calendar — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Sick leave, eAU & continued pay — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Sick leave, eAU & continued pay — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Payroll handover, time tracking & API — found from sitemap www.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Payroll handover, time tracking & API — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Health data, access & works council — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 Health data, access & works council — found from sitemap support.clockin.de Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →