Absence Management
Timetastic
UK / wider Europe Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Timetastic Ltd · timetastic.co.uk
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.
Timetastic at a glance
- Vendor
- Timetastic Ltd
- 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
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Timetastic 1/5, the mean of 6 judges. Timetastic is absence-management software from Timetastic Ltd of Wilmslow, England, presented as "Proudly built in the UK & Canada". how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 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
Timetastic is absence-management software from Timetastic Ltd of Wilmslow, England, presented as "Proudly built in the UK & Canada". It scores strongest on the everyday flow: requests and approvals and payroll handover both cluster at 4, on approvals, a shared calendar, daily Slack and Teams updates, Sage 50 and QuickBooks integrations and a payroll data export. It scores weakest on sick leave and eAU (0 to 1) — no public information on certificates, continued-pay counting or BEM — and on sovereignty (0 to 1), where data residency and subprocessors are unknown on the captured pages beyond Stripe for payments. Leave policies cluster at 2, with no public information on part-time proration, carry-over expiry or public holidays per German federal state or Austrian region. Pricing transparency spans 1 to 2: tiers Basic, Business and Pro are named publicly, no price figures appear, and captured pages give different plan names. Absence data protection spans 3 to 4, with specific retention and deletion commitments but no public information on who may see a sickness reason. Judges' totals run 2.0 to 2.7 with no disagreement flagged.
Speaks for it
- Requests and approvals scores cluster at 4, on evidenced approvals, a shared calendar, calendar sync and daily Slack and Teams absence updates.
- Payroll handover scores cluster at 4, with Sage 50 and QuickBooks integrations, a payroll data export, payroll-ready timesheets and an API named.
- Retention and deletion rules are specific: six-year retention for accounting and legal purposes, deletion from live servers on cancellation with backups purged in 10 to 14 days, dormant accounts deleted at 18 months, and support conversations auto-deleted at 12 months.
- A data processing agreement is available, and most user rights can be exercised in self-service.
- The tier structure is public, showing which features sit in Basic, Business and Pro.
Held against it
- Sick leave and eAU (electronic certificate of incapacity) scores sit at 0 to 1, with no public information on certificate retrieval, continued-pay counting, BEM or child-sick days.
- Leave policies scores cluster at 2, with no public information on part-time proration, carry-over with expiry, or public holidays per German federal state or Austrian region.
- Sovereignty scores sit at 0 to 1: the vendor is Timetastic Ltd of Wilmslow, England, "Proudly built in the UK & Canada", and data residency, hosting and subprocessors are unknown on the captured pages beyond Stripe as payment provider.
- Pricing transparency scores sit at 1 to 2, with no price figures, pricing basis, minimum term or VAT treatment on the captured pages, and the captured pages give different plan names (Basic and Pro on the calendar connections page, Business on the pricing page).
- No public information covers who may see a sickness reason or certificate, access logging, or guardrails for the burnout board and risk alerts.
Best for
- You need a day-to-day time-off flow — approvals, a shared calendar, calendar sync and daily Slack or Teams updates — where requests and approvals scores cluster at 4.
- You hand payroll over to Sage 50 or QuickBooks through a payroll data export or payroll-ready timesheets, with an API listed.
- You want documented data lifecycle rules — six-year retention for accounting and legal purposes and deletion from backups within 10 to 14 days of cancellation — with a data processing agreement available.
- You need configurable leave types and holiday allowance records for a team whose absences do not involve statutory sick-leave administration.
Avoid if
- You must administer sick leave with the eAU, continued-pay counting, BEM or child-sick days — sick leave and eAU scored 0 to 1, with no public information on any of them.
- Your payroll depends on German or Austrian leave rules such as part-time proration, regional public holidays or carry-over with expiry, or on DATEV or another German payroll system — leave policies scored 2 and no German payroll system is named.
- You require European data residency or a published subprocessor list — sovereignty scored 0 to 1, and residency, ownership and subprocessor exposure are recorded as unknown.
- You need a price before talking to sales — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Entitlements & German leave rules | 1 of 5 |
| Requests, approvals & team calendar | 2 of 5 |
| Sick leave, eAU & continued pay | 0.5 of 5 |
| Payroll handover, time tracking & API | 2 of 5 |
| Health data, access & works council | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 0.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 1 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
Holiday allowance records and configurable leave types with booking limits per type are evidenced, which covers the bare minimum my twelve-person team needs. But we found no public information on public holidays by region, part-time or joiner/leaver proration, half days, hourly leave or carry-over with expiry — with part-timers on both shifts, that silence decides it. 2 3 7
The Managing Director
The pages show configurable leave types, holiday allowance records and approvals, which is the bare bones of entitlement tracking. But we found no public information on part-time proration, German federal-state public holidays, half days, hourly leave or carry-over with an expiry notice — the exact points I am personally liable for — and nothing on the captured pages mentions German or Austrian leave law at all. 1 2 3 7
The Payroll Accountant
What the pages show is holiday allowance records plus configurable leave types — a workable employee-facing planner, but nothing that models German leave law. I found no public information on part-time proration, carry-over with expiry and notice, public holidays per federal state, or statutory versus contractual leave kept apart, so I could not close a German payroll month on these balances. 2 3 8
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages evidence configurable leave types and holiday-allowance records with approvals, but I found no public information on part-time proration, carry-over with expiry, half days or hourly leave, or public holidays per German federal state or Austrian region. A product presented as built in the UK and Canada says nothing, in anything captured here, about German or Austrian leave law. 2 3 7
The HR IT Integrator
Holiday allowance records and configurable leave types are shown, which is the entry level of entitlement handling, but I found no public information on part-time proration, carry-over with expiry and notice, public holidays per German federal state, half or hourly leave, or special and parental leave types, and nothing keeps statutory and contractual entitlement apart. 2 3 7 8
The Skeptic
Allowances per employee ('holiday allowance records and approvals') and configurable leave types are evidenced, with booking limits per leave type in the top tier. But we found no public information on part-time proration, carry-over and its expiry, or holidays per German federal state or Austrian region — the leave-types page speaks only of 'all types of absence' with no German rule in sight. 2 3 8
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
Recording and approving time off, a mobile and desktop app, a shared calendar of who's off, calendar sync and Slack and Teams daily updates are all evidenced, which is the everyday flow I need on my phone. But we found no public information on naming a substitute on a request, approvers per team, or minimum-staffing and blackout rules at approval time; the shift conflict detection appears in the rota planning module, and nothing shows it firing when leave is approved. 1 2 3 7 8
The Managing Director
Approvals, a mobile and desktop app, a shared calendar, calendar connections and daily Slack or Teams updates give me the everyday flow for a company my size. We found no public information on named substitutes, approvers per team or department, blackout or staffing rules, or whether colleagues see only that someone is absent without the reason, so I cannot confirm the visibility side of it. 2 3 7 8
The Payroll Accountant
The everyday flow is evidenced: approvals in one place, a shared calendar, mobile and desktop apps, Slack and Teams feeds and a daily who's-off update, with calendar connections into the regular calendar. I found no public information on substitutes, approvers per team or department, or what colleagues are allowed to see of an absence reason, which is what separates a planner from an approval process I would rely on. 1 2 3 7
The Data Protection Officer
Booking and approving every kind of time off on mobile and desktop, a shared team calendar, calendar sync, daily Slack updates and Slack and Teams integrations are all evidenced. I found no public information on substitutes, approval chains, or who may see the reason behind an absence — the visibility question I care about most when the reason is illness. 1 2 3 8
The HR IT Integrator
The everyday flow is evidenced: an app to record and approve time off, a shared calendar with a feed into the customer's own calendar on Basic and Pro, and daily absence updates in Slack and Teams. I found no public information on substitutes, multi-level or per-team approval chains, delegation while an approver is away, or how much of an absence reason colleagues are allowed to see. 2 3 7 8
The Skeptic
The everyday flow is real: mobile and desktop apps, approvals ('record and approve every kind of time off'), a shared calendar, calendar sync, and daily who's-off updates into Slack and Teams. We found no public information on substitutes, approvers per team or multi-level chains, blackout rules, or what colleagues may see of an absence reason — solid basics, governance layer unevidenced. 2 3 7 8
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
Leave types are generic — book, track and record all types of absence — and we found no public information on sick notifications, the eAU, who retrieves it from the insurer, certificates, or how sick days count towards continued pay and BEM thresholds. The burnout board and risk alerts are wellbeing features, not a regulated sick process. 3 8
The Managing Director
Sickness would sit as just another type under "book, track and record all types of absence". We found no public information on eAU retrieval, certificates, the six-week continued-pay count, BEM thresholds or child sick days, so I would be back to phoning health insurers and counting sick days by hand. 8 2
The Payroll Accountant
The captured pages have no word on the eAU, sick certificates, the six-week continued-pay count per illness or BEM — for my payroll run this is a blank page. At most sickness would sit among the generic leave types, with no retrieval process, no counting and no document handling described. 3 7 8
The Data Protection Officer
Absence is generic — the pages say to book, track and record all types of absence — and I found no public information on the electronic certificate of incapacity, its retrieval, paper certificates, continued-pay counting or BEM steps. A sick day here would be just another leave type, with nothing captured showing it is governed as the special-category process the law makes it. 2 7 8
The HR IT Integrator
The only relevant statement is the generic one about recording every kind of time off across multiple leave types; I found no public information on eAU retrieval by the tool or via a payroll system, on certificates, on counting towards the six-week continued-pay period or BEM, or on child-sick days. 3 7
The Skeptic
Sickness would be one more item under 'Book, track and record all types of absence', and that is the entire story: we found no public information on the eAU, who retrieves a certificate, document upload, continued-pay counting or child-sick days. The burnout board and risk alerts touch health-adjacent patterns with no regulated sick-leave process documented around them. 2 8
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
Payroll-ready timesheets, a payroll data export and an available API are evidenced, with Sage 50 and QuickBooks named as integrations, which is a real handover path. But no German payroll system such as DATEV is named, and we found no public information on mapping absence types to payroll codes, monthly period locks, webhooks or API limits. 2 7
The Managing Director
An API is listed, the time-tracking module promises payroll-ready timesheets and a payroll data export, and Sage 50 and QuickBooks are named. We found no public information on DATEV or any other German payroll system, on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on period locking, and the API appears as a word on a features page rather than as documentation. 2 7
The Payroll Accountant
Sage 50 and QuickBooks are named integrations, an API is offered, and the time module speaks of a payroll data export and payroll-ready timesheets — but none of that is DATEV or any German payroll system. I found no public information on mapping absence types to payroll codes, on monthly closing that locks past periods once paid, or on API limits and webhooks. 1 2 7
The Data Protection Officer
A payroll data export, payroll-ready timesheets, named Sage 50 and QuickBooks integrations and an API are evidenced. I found no public information on DATEV or any other German payroll system, on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on locking past periods at monthly close. 2 7
The HR IT Integrator
Sage 50 and QuickBooks are named alongside Slack, Teams and Google Workspace, an API is mentioned, and the time-clock side promises payroll-ready timesheets and a payroll data export — so more than a bare CSV exists. But no German payroll system is named anywhere, there is no DATEV, LODAS or Lohn und Gehalt connector, and the API appears as a single word with no documentation, no webhooks, no payroll-code mapping and no period lock, so a German payroll run would still be hand-built. 2 7
The Skeptic
Sage 50 and QuickBooks integrations are named, the time-tracking module advertises 'payroll data export' and 'payroll-ready timesheets', and an API is listed on the features page. But we found no public information on a German payroll system such as DATEV, absence types mapped to payroll codes, period locking or an audit trail — the named systems are an Anglophone accounting stack, and 'API' as a single word is not documentation. 2 7
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 privacy policy is concrete on lifecycle — six-year retention for accounting and legal purposes, deletion from live servers immediately on cancellation and from backups within 10 to 14 days, support conversations auto-deleted at 12 months — and a data processing agreement is offered. But nothing states who may see a sickness reason or certificate, retention is stated as fixed rather than configurable, and we found no public information on access logging or documentation aimed at a works agreement. 2 3 4 6
The Managing Director
A data processing agreement is available and retention is stated plainly: six years for accounting and legal purposes, deletion from live servers on cancellation with backups purged over 10 to 14 days. We found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, on retention configurable per record type, on access logging, or on anything aimed at a works council, which is where my exposure sits. 3 4 6
The Payroll Accountant
The privacy policy is unusually concrete on retention and deletion: six years for accounting and legal purposes, data removed from live servers on cancellation with backups cleared in 10 to 14 days, support conversations auto-deleted at twelve months, user rights exercisable in self-service, and a data processing agreement available. I found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, on access logging, on configurable retention per record type, or on anything aimed at a works council. 3 4 6
The Data Protection Officer
The privacy policy makes real commitments: deletion from live servers on cancellation with backups purged within 10 to 14 days, dormant accounts deleted at 18 months, support conversations auto-deleted at 12 months, six-year retention only for accounting and legal purposes, a DPA and self-service rights. But I found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, on access logging, on configurable retention for absence records, or on works-council material — and the burnout board and risk alerts are advertised with no statement on whether analytics touch health data. 2 3 4 6
The HR IT Integrator
A data processing agreement is available and the vendor documents deletion concretely: data removed from live servers on cancellation with backups purged in 10 to 14 days, dormant accounts deleted after 18 months, and support conversations auto-deleted after 12 months. Retention is a fixed six years rather than configurable, there is burnout and risk-alert analytics on absence data with no stated guardrails for health-related data, and I found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, on access logging, or on works-agreement support. 2 3 4 6
The Skeptic
Retention is stated plainly — six years for accounting and legal after closure, deletion from live servers on cancellation with backups purged in 10 to 14 days, support conversations auto-deleted at twelve months — and a data processing agreement is available. But we found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, configurable retention per record, or access logging, while the burnout board and risk alerts run on absence patterns with no stated configuration gate. 2 4 6
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 captured pages say the product is proudly built in the UK & Canada, and we found no public information on EU hosting, the contracting entity's jurisdiction, data residency or a subprocessor list with locations — Stripe appears only as the payment provider. For absence and sickness data of a European workforce, nothing in the evidence shows a European chain. 3 4 8
The Managing Director
The vendor is "Proudly built in the UK & Canada", support runs on UK time, and we found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction on the vendor's own pages, nor on hosting or data residency. No subprocessor list appears beyond Stripe as the payment provider, so nothing in the captured material places my employees' absence and sickness data under European sovereignty. 3 4 5
The Payroll Accountant
Timetastic presents itself as a UK company, built in the UK and Canada with support staffed UK hours, so the chain as captured is not European. I found no public information on where absence data is hosted, on the contracting entity's jurisdiction on the vendor's own pages, or on a subprocessor list beyond Stripe for card payments. 3 4 5 7
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity is Timetastic Ltd of Wilmslow, England — outside the EU — marketing itself as built in the UK and Canada. I found no public information on where absence data is hosted or on subprocessors beyond Stripe for payments, no published subprocessor list with locations, and no public information on whether the DPA covers sickness data as special-category processing. 3 4 5
The HR IT Integrator
The contracting entity is Timetastic Ltd of Wilmslow, England — outside the EU — and 'proudly built in the UK & Canada' speaks to where the product is made, not where absence data is hosted, which is unstated. No subprocessor list is published; the only named third party is Stripe for payments. 4 5 7
The Skeptic
The pages say 'Proudly built in the UK & Canada', the vendor is recorded as Timetastic Ltd of Wilmslow, England, and Stripe is named as the payment processor — a non-EU picture for absence data, and the vendor's own captured pages do not confirm the contracting entity. We found no public information on data residency, hosting location, or a subprocessor list with locations. 3 4 7
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 pricing page lays out what each tier and module contains, but no price figures appear in any captured page, and the captured pages give different plan names — Basic and Pro on the calendar connections page against Business on the pricing page. We found no public information on prices per user, minimum users, minimum term or VAT treatment, so the annual invoice cannot be computed from what is public. 2 4 8
The Managing Director
The pricing page names the plans and shows which features sit in each tier, but we found no public price figures at all — not a starting price, a per-user basis, minimum users, minimum term or VAT treatment. From these pages I cannot begin to compute what forty people would cost me per year. 2 8
The Payroll Accountant
The pricing page publishes a Business and a Pro tier with their feature allocation, but I found no public information on any price figure, the pricing basis, minimum term or VAT treatment — only that pricing is shown in the local currency via IP lookup. An annual invoice is not computable from the public pages, which is the first question I would put to sales. 2 4
The Data Protection Officer
The pricing page names Basic, Business and Pro plans and shows which features sit where — calendar connections on Basic and Pro, booking limits, absence reports and enhanced profiles in Pro. But I found no public price figures, pricing basis, minimum users or minimum term in the captured pages, so an annual invoice cannot be worked out from them. 2 8
The HR IT Integrator
The plan structure is public — Basic, a Business plan and Pro, with calendar connections on Basic and Pro and items like booking limits, absence trends and company-wide reports in Pro — and pricing is currency-adjusted by IP location. But the captured pages give no price figures at all, nor a pricing basis, minimum users or minimum term, so the real annual invoice cannot be computed from them. 2 4 8
The Skeptic
The pricing page names the tiers — Basic, Business, Pro — and lists which features sit where, including booking limits and company-wide reports in Pro. But across the captures we found no price figure, no pricing basis, no minimum term and no VAT treatment; only that pricing is shown 'in the appropriate currency', so an annual cost could not be computed from the public pages. 2 8
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 | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Timetastic
Is Timetastic European?
Yes, though not from the EU. whats-best.ai classifies Timetastic as UK / wider Europe.
Where does Timetastic store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does Timetastic have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Timetastic?
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: Timetastic alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 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. 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.
- 9 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
- 3 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
- 3 pricing 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 hosting 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 compliance 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
- 1 subprocessors 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
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is 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 (8)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Absence management timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Company details timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Terms of service timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Requests, approvals & team calendar — found from sitemap timetastic.co.uk Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →