Absence Management
WhosOff
UK / wider Europe Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by X:drive Computing Limited · www.whosoff.com
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.
WhosOff at a glance
- Vendor
- X:drive Computing Limited
- 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 WhosOff 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. WhosOff is an absence management product from X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England. 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
WhosOff is an absence management product from X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England. It is strongest on requests and approvals, where scores cluster at 7-8: multi-level approval chains with primary and back-up approvers, minimum staffing levels, conflict rules, iOS and Android apps, and calendar feeds into Outlook, Office 365, Google Calendar and iCal. It is weakest on sick leave and eAU, pricing transparency and sovereignty, which cluster at 0-1: sickness appears only as a leave type name, with no public information on eAU retrieval or continued-pay counting; the only cost fact published is a free trial until Wednesday, 25th November 2026; and we found no public information on hosting location or subprocessors, beyond the privacy policy naming analytics providers such as Google based outside the UK. The captured pages give different signals on health data, with the privacy policy stating no health information is collected while feature pages list sickness among tracked leave types. Leave policies, at 2-4, reflect balances amended by hand. The judges did not genuinely split: payroll handover clustered at 4, and no notable disagreement was recorded.
Speaks for it
- Multi-level approval chains with primary and back-up approvers, minimum staffing levels and conflict rules are documented
- iOS and Android apps let staff request and approvers approve leave from a phone
- A documented RESTful API covers leave, overtime, allowances and reporting, with a sandbox, IP restrictions and webhooks
- Calendar feeds push approved leave into Outlook, Office 365, Google Calendar and iCal
- Unlimited custom leave types can be tracked in hours or days with per-type annual limits
Held against it
- Sick leave and eAU scores cluster at 0-1, with no public information on eAU retrieval, continued-pay counting or child sick days
- Entitlements are balances a super user amends by hand, with no public information on part-time proration or public holidays by German federal state or Austrian region
- We found no public information on a named payroll system, absence-to-payroll-code mapping or period locking
- The only published cost fact is a free trial until Wednesday, 25th November 2026, with no tier price or pricing basis
- Sovereignty scores cluster at 0-1, with no public information on hosting location or subprocessors
Best for
- You need a dependable everyday request-and-approval flow with mobile apps, back-up approvers and clash prevention
- Your team tracks a range of custom leave types in hours or days against a shared central calendar
- You have development capacity to pull absence data through a documented REST API into your own systems
Avoid if
- Your sick-leave process needs eAU retrieval, six-week continued-pay counting or child sick days in the product, where the captured pages show only sickness as a leave type name
- You hand absences to DATEV or another named payroll system and need code mapping and period locks
- You must compute an annual invoice before committing, which the published pricing does not allow
- Your procurement requires an EU contracting entity, since the terms name X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Entitlements & German leave rules | 1.5 of 5 |
| Requests, approvals & team calendar | 3.5 of 5 |
| Sick leave, eAU & continued pay | 0 of 5 |
| Payroll handover, time tracking & API | 2 of 5 |
| Health data, access & works council | 1.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 0 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 0.5 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
A super user sets each person's entitlement per year, can adjust opening and remaining balances into the next year, and records a comment on every change — workable, but manual. Unlimited custom leave types with their own rules and limits, and leave tracked in hours per type, go further; we found no public information on public holidays by federal state, part-time proration, or carry-over with an expiry date. For anyone running German contracts, that silence decides it. 7 6 8
The Managing Director
Entitlements are a balance a super user amends by hand — opening and remaining figures for this year or next, with a comment box — and I found no public information on automatic part-time proration, public holidays per federal state, or carry-over that expires only after employees were told. Hourly and half-day tracking, unlimited custom leave types with their own limits, and personal overrides of company defaults are real, but none of the German mechanics I am personally liable for are in evidence. 6 7 8
The Payroll Accountant
Entitlements are opening and remaining balances a super user amends by hand per staff member, for the current or the next year, so carry-over is a manual adjustment and nothing recalculates itself; I found no public information on part-time proration, public holidays per German federal state, or half-day rules. Custom leave types with per-type annual limits and hours-or-days tracking are evidenced, but nothing separates statutory from contractual leave or warns employees before carried leave lapses. 6 7 8
The Data Protection Officer
Entitlements live at the level of the individual staff member: super users amend this year's or next year's opening and remaining balances with a comment on each change, leave types are unlimited and configurable, and leave can be tracked in hours or days. We found no public information on part-time proration, public holidays by German federal state or Austrian region, carry-over expiry with automatic notice, or keeping statutory and contractual leave apart. That is an allowance ledger, not a modelled entitlement. 6 7 8
The HR IT Integrator
Entitlement handling is manual: super users amend each person's days for the current or next year, with opening and remaining balances adjusted by hand — carry-over as a manual adjustment — plus custom leave types with per-type limits and hourly tracking. I found no public information on part-time proration, public holidays by German federal state or Austrian region, or carry-over expiry with notice to employees. 6 7 8
The Skeptic
Entitlements are numbers a super user types in and amends by hand — the help pages describe editing "This Years or Next Year's Opening and Remaining" balances — and the only computed rules evidenced are per-type yearly caps and hourly versus daily tracking. We found no public information on part-time proration, joiner or leaver recalculation, carry-over expiry notices, or public holidays by German federal state or Austrian region. 6 7 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
This is nearly my daily flow on a phone: iOS and Android apps for requesting and approving, multi-level chains with primary and back-up approvers, and department minimum-staffing settings with rules that stop close colleagues booking the same days — the clash warning I want before I sign anything. Email notifications on request, decision and cancellation are configurable, and calendar feeds cover Outlook, Google and Apple. I found no public information on naming a substitute on the request itself, on calendar visibility set per role, or on Teams and Slack. 8 6 11 10
The Managing Director
The everyday flow is well evidenced: iOS and Android apps, approvers per team or department with multiple levels and primary and back-up approvers, minimum staffing levels, conflict rules, a central calendar with feeds into Google, Outlook, iCal, Office 365 and iPhone, and email notifications on request, approval and cancellation. Approver permissions are granular and approvers can add, edit or cancel leave on a staff member's behalf. I found no public information on Microsoft Teams or Slack integration, or on reason visibility beyond per-leave-type settings, so I stop short of the top band. 6 8 10 11
The Payroll Accountant
Multiple approval levels with primary and back-up approvers, approvers who can add, edit and cancel leave on a staff member's behalf, minimum staffing departments with leave types flagged against them, and conflict rules stopping close colleagues booking the same days are all documented. Mobile apps, a central calendar, per-leave-type email notifications and calendar sync to Outlook, Office 365, Google and iCal are evidenced with audit trails claimed; I found no public information on shift-plan checks or reporting on pending and overdue approvals. 6 8 10 11
The Data Protection Officer
The everyday flow is well evidenced: mobile requests on iOS and Android, multi-level approval with primary and back-up approvers, per-team workflows, conflict rules and minimum staffing levels, email notifications and calendar feeds into all the major calendar clients, with approvers able to add, edit and cancel leave under graduated permissions. My concern — what a colleague may see of a reason — rests only on per-leave-type "visibility settings". We found no public information on calendar visibility by role or on reporting for pending and overdue approvals. 6 8 10 11
The HR IT Integrator
Approval is well built out: multi-level chains with primary and back-up approvers per team, minimum staffing levels per department, conflict rules, and approvers who can add, edit or cancel leave on behalf of staff. The central calendar with per-leave-type visibility, email notifications on request, decision and cancellation, and calendar feeds into Outlook, Office 365 and Google Calendar cover the everyday flow; I found no public information on delegation while an approver is away, Teams or Slack integration, or reporting on pending and overdue requests. 6 8 10 11
The Skeptic
This is the one area the captured pages genuinely evidence: mobile apps on iOS and Android, approvers per team or department, multiple approval levels with primary and back-up approvers, conflict rules, minimum staffing levels, and calendar feeds into Google, Outlook, Office 365 and iCal. What holds it down: we found no public information on substitutes named on a request, a Teams or Slack integration, or a documented per-request approval history — the "complete audit trails" line is features-page copy, and calendar visibility is only implied by per-leave-type "visibility settings". 6 8 10 11
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
Sickness shows up only as one leave type among holiday, parental and study. We found no public information on the eAU, on medical certificates, on counting sick days towards continued pay, or on child-sick days — including on the vendor's own sick-leave page — so the regulated side of absence simply is not evidenced. 8 3
The Managing Director
Sickness appears only as one more configurable leave type alongside holiday and parental, and the privacy policy states that no health data is collected at all; I found no public information on eAU retrieval, who retrieves it, certificates, six-week continued-pay counting, BEM or child-sick days. A sick-leave management page is in the captured set, but no detail from it is confirmed here. 3 4 8
The Payroll Accountant
Sickness appears only as one of the custom leave types, and I found no public information on eAU retrieval, who retrieves it, sick certificates, counting towards the six-week continued-pay limit, BEM, or child sick days. The privacy policy even states that no health data is collected, so there is nothing here a German sick-pay process could attach to. 4 8
The Data Protection Officer
Sickness is listed merely as one configurable leave type alongside holiday, parental, remote and study. We found no public information on electronic certificate of incapacity (eAU) retrieval or who would perform it, certificate uploads, counting sick days toward the six weeks of continued pay, child sick days, or the BEM process. Nothing in the captured pages shows engagement with sick leave as a regulated process. 3 8
The HR IT Integrator
Sickness appears only as one leave type alongside holiday and parental; I found no public information on the eAU, who retrieves it, certificates, child-sick days, or how sick days count towards the six-week continued-pay limit — the vendor's own sick-leave page yielded nothing on the regulated process either. 3 8
The Skeptic
Sickness appears in the captured pages only as a name in the leave-type list. We found no public information on eAU retrieval, who fetches a certificate, the six-week continued-pay count, BEM handling or child-sick days — and the vendor's own sick-leave page yielded no confirmed detail on any of it. 3 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
The documented RESTful API with endpoints for leave, allowances, overtime and reporting, plus webhooks, a sandbox and IP restrictions, is real plumbing, and overtime is tracked in the product itself. But we found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping leave types to payroll codes, on a monthly period lock, or on published API limits. The last mile into payroll is invisible to a buyer. 9 10 8
The Managing Director
There is a genuinely documented RESTful API — sandbox, bearer-token and SHA512 authentication, IP restrictions, endpoints for leave, user allowance, overtime and reporting — plus webhooks and an overtime module. But I found no public information on any integration with a named German payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on a monthly period lock, so the plumbing exists while the handover I would be liable for does not. 8 9 10
The Payroll Accountant
A documented RESTful API with leave, overtime, allowance and reporting endpoints, a sandbox, IP restrictions and webhooks exists, but I found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping leave types to payroll codes, or on a monthly closing that locks past periods. Until then, absences reach my payroll run only as data someone re-keys by hand. 8 9 10
The Data Protection Officer
A documented RESTful API with named endpoints, a sandbox, token management by the super user, IP restriction and webhooks is genuinely more than a file export. But we found no public information on any named payroll system — DATEV or otherwise — on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on locking a closed period. Reporting appears only as a customer testimonial rather than as a documented payroll handover. 8 9 10
The HR IT Integrator
The RESTful API is documented in earnest — endpoints for leave, user allowances, overtime and reporting, bearer-token authentication, IP restrictions and a sandbox — and webhooks plus SSO through Auth0, Azure, Okta and OneLogin are published. But we found no public information on a connector to DATEV or any other named German payroll system, absence types mapped to payroll codes, period locks, or published API limits; overtime is tracked in-product, yet nothing shows balances reconciled with an external time-tracking system. 8 9 10
The Skeptic
There is a documented RESTful API with token authentication, a sandbox, IP restrictions and webhooks, which is more than a CSV. But we found no public information on any named payroll system, payroll code mapping or month-end period lock — the only export mention is a customer testimonial about HR reports — so absences are pullable, yet their arrival in any payroll format is unevidenced. 8 9 10
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
Roles for staff, approvers and super users exist and leave types carry visibility settings, but we found no public information on who may see a sickness reason, on logging access to health-related records, or on documentation for a works council. The captured pages give different signals on health data — the privacy policy states that none is collected, while the features page lists sickness among tracked leave types — and retention is described only as keeping data as long as reasonably necessary, with no fixed period. I would want that reconciled in writing before putting twelve people's absences in it. 4 8 11
The Managing Director
Permissions distinguish staff, approvers and super users, with configurable approver permissions and per-leave-type visibility settings, and the privacy policy promises breach notification and free access requests. But retention is stated only as "as long as reasonably necessary" with no configurable deletion of absence records, and I found no public information on a data processing agreement, on access logging for health-related records, or on anything aimed at a works council. 4 8 11
The Payroll Accountant
User levels with extra approver permissions and per-leave-type visibility settings are documented, but I found no public information on configurable retention or deletion of absence records, on logging access to sick data, or on documentation for a works agreement. Retention is stated only as "as long as reasonably necessary", and the privacy policy says no health data is collected while the feature pages list sickness among the leave types — the captured pages give different signals here. 4 8 11
The Data Protection Officer
Roles exist and can be graduated — super users, approvers with extra permissions, staff — and two-factor authentication is offered, but I found no public information on restricting sickness reasons or documents to named roles, on whether access to health-related records is logged (the features page promises "complete audit trails" without that detail), or on configurable retention and deletion of absence records. The privacy policy states that health information is not collected as special-category data and retains personal data only "as long as reasonably necessary". We found no public information on a data processing agreement or on documentation aimed at a works agreement. 4 8 10 11
The HR IT Integrator
Roles for staff, approvers and super users exist with per-leave-type visibility settings, but I found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, and retention is stated only as 'as long as reasonably necessary' with no configurable period. The privacy policy states that no special-category data including health information is collected, while the feature pages list sickness among the leave types; nothing is published on access logging for health-related records or documentation for a works agreement. 4 8 11
The Skeptic
Roles exist — staff, approver, super user — and leave types carry "visibility settings", the only access control evidenced for sickness reasons. We found no public information on configurable retention for absence records, access logging, a DPA or works-council documentation; and the captured pages give different signals on health data, since the privacy policy states "We do not collect any Special Categories of Personal Data" including health information, while the features pages list sickness as a tracked leave type. 4 8 11
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 contracting entity is X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England — outside the EU — and we found no public information on hosting location, ownership or subprocessors, while the privacy policy itself mentions analytics providers such as Google based outside the UK. Where my team's absence data lives, and which companies touch it, is a question the public pages leave unanswered. 5 4
The Managing Director
The contracting vendor is X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England; I found no public information on hosting location or on subprocessors, and the privacy policy itself names analytics providers "such as Google based outside the UK". For my German absence and sickness data that is an unexplained chain, with only the published breach-notification procedure and data-rights list to lift it off the floor. 4 5
The Payroll Accountant
The vendor is X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England, and I found no public information on hosting location, EU data residency, or a published subprocessor list; the privacy policy names analytics providers such as Google based outside the UK. Nothing European end to end is evidenced for absence data. 4
The Data Protection Officer
The terms name X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England as the vendor — a UK entity outside the EU — and the captured pages say nothing about where absence or sickness data is hosted. The privacy policy discloses analytics providers "such as Google based outside the UK", and for email, push notifications, support and hosting subprocessors we found no public information. For anyone who cares where a sick day lives, this is the thinnest picture in front of me. 4 5
The HR IT Integrator
Contracting appears to be with X:drive Computing Limited of Canterbury, England, while the captured pages state nothing on where absence and sickness data is hosted or resident. We found no public information on subprocessors beyond the privacy policy naming analytics providers such as Google based outside the UK, and no certification is published. 4 5
The Skeptic
The contracting party sits in Canterbury, England per its terms — outside the EU — and we found no public information on where absence data is hosted or which subprocessors process it; the privacy policy's only located third party is "analytics providers such as Google based outside the UK". Every sovereignty attribute that could be sourced came back unknown. 4 5
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 only price-adjacent statement anywhere is a free trial "until Wednesday, 25th November 2026"; we found no public information on tier prices, the per-employee basis, add-on costs, minimum users or contract terms, even though a pricing page was captured. I could not begin to compute an annual invoice for twelve people from what is public. 2 9
The Managing Director
The only cost information in the captured pages is a free trial running "until Wednesday, 25th November 2026"; I found no public information on price per employee or per user, what sits in which tier, minimum users or the minimum term. I cannot even begin to compute the invoice for my forty people. 2 9
The Payroll Accountant
The only public price information is a free trial running to a named date; I found no public information on tier prices, the pricing basis, minimum users, minimum term or VAT treatment. A buyer cannot compute the annual invoice for a given headcount from these pages. 9
The Data Protection Officer
The only pricing fact the captured pages confirm is a free trial running until Wednesday, 25th November 2026. We found no public information on tier prices, the pricing basis, which features sit in which tier, minimum users, minimum term or VAT treatment. No buyer could compute an annual cost from what is published. 2 9
The HR IT Integrator
The only pricing fact the captured pages yield is a free trial until Wednesday, 25th November 2026; the pricing page produced no tier price, pricing basis, minimum users, minimum term or add-on prices. An annual invoice is therefore not computable from public information. 2 9
The Skeptic
The pricing page was captured and produced no confirmed prices: we found no public information on tier prices, the per-employee or per-user basis, feature placement across tiers, minimum users or the minimum term. The single cost fact anywhere is a free trial running to a fixed date in November 2026 — real, but no invoice can be computed from it. 2 9
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 WhosOff
Is WhosOff European?
Yes, though not from the EU. whats-best.ai classifies WhosOff as UK / wider Europe.
Where does WhosOff store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does WhosOff have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to WhosOff?
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: WhosOff 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 — Subprocessors, 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.
- 51 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
- 32 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
- 17 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
- 11 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
- 7 compliance 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
- 6 data 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
- 6 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 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
- 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 (11)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Sick leave management www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Requests, approvals & team calendar — found from sitemap www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Payroll handover, time tracking & API — found from sitemap www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Payroll handover, time tracking & API — found from sitemap www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Health data, access & works council — found from sitemap www.whosoff.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →