whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Time Tracking & Attendance

Everhour

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Everhour · everhour.com

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

Everhour: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Everhour: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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.

Everhour at a glance

Vendor
Everhour
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
Free plan
Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 20 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Everhour 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. Everhour, a time-tracking and attendance product, is strongest at project and billing and weakest at sovereignty and pricing transparency, where the only public terms are a 14-day free trial with no credit card. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 20 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 21 Oct 2026. all sources

Everhour alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Works Council Advocate

Weighted verdict

Has co-determination over how working time is recorded (BetrVG §87 (1) 6) and will not approve a system that watches more than it measures. Asks what GPS actually stores, who can read an individual's day, what is logged and what can be switched off. Reads "productivity insights" as a warning.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Works Council Advocate

Panel median The Works Council Advocate This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Works Council Advocate
Capture in the real workplace 2 of 5 2 of 5
Working-time law & audit record 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
Absence & shift planning 2 of 5 2 of 5
Project, cost-centre & billing 4.5 of 5 4.5 of 5
Payroll handoff 2 of 5 2 of 5
European sovereignty 1 of 5 0.5 of 5

Capture in the real workplace

How this is scored

How time actually gets recorded across the workforces a buyer has — desk staff, field and site crews, shift and deskless workers — and what happens when the network is not there.

0 — One browser timer and nothing else; anyone away from a desk records nothing.

3 — Web plus a mobile app, but no offline capture, no shared terminal, and corrections are an admin task rather than a workflow.

5 — Web, mobile and at least one shared capture point (kiosk, terminal or badge), with offline capture that syncs, and a correction workflow with approval.

8 — Several capture paths including hardware terminals or badge readers, reliable offline handling, GPS or geofenced check-in where the vendor states its limits, and bulk correction with an audit trail of who changed what.

10 — Capture fits the workforce rather than the reverse: desk, deskless, field and shift models all first-class, offline as a designed state rather than a failure mode, and every correction attributable, reasoned and reversible.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Timer, desktop, mobile and even a watch are capture paths, and corrections run through an approval workflow with the clock-in, clock-out and break actions visible in a change history — that part I can co-determine with. But the offline story is a free offline timesheet for time away from the main system rather than a designed offline state, and we found no public information on a shared terminal, on bulk correction, or on GPS or geofenced check-in and what it stores, so I cannot judge what the system would watch rather than measure. 1 4 8 12

Report an error

Working-time law & audit record

How this is scored

Whether the record satisfies the German recording duty (BAG 2022, § 3 ArbSchG) and the ArbZG rules around it — breaks, maximum hours, rest periods, retention — and whether it survives being inspected.

0 — Hours are summed and nothing else; no break handling, no limits, no retention statement.

3 — Break deduction exists but is a flat rule; no daily maximum or rest-period checks, and no stated retention period.

5 — Configurable break rules, warnings on the 8/10-hour daily maximum and the 11-hour rest period, and per-employee reports covering the recording duty.

8 — The ArbZG rules are modelled rather than approximated: break and rest enforcement with documented exceptions, overtime and time-account rules, the two-year retention handled by the system, and an export built for an inspection.

10 — The vendor treats the record as evidence: tamper-evident entries with full change history, retention and deletion executed per statute, documented handling of on-call, standby and travel time, and published guidance mapping features to the ArbZG sections they serve.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Everything the captured pages show on working-time law is American FLSA material — a 40-hour weekly basis, a $684 weekly salary test, and record retention of two to three years — while a working day is computed as first clock-in to last clock-out minus breaks and nothing more. I found no public information on the German recording duty, the eight-hour daily maximum, eleven-hour rest periods, configurable break rules or a retention period for working-time records, and without that I cannot approve this as the record our co-determination covers. 4 5 12

Report an error

Absence & shift planning

How this is scored

Vacation, sickness and the shift or duty roster — the half of attendance that decides whether the time data means anything.

0 — No absence handling; vacation lives in a separate calendar or spreadsheet.

3 — Vacation requests with approval, but entitlement is manual, carry-over is not handled and there is no rostering.

5 — Automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, an absence calendar, and basic shift planning with availability.

8 — Public-holiday calendars per location, pro-rata entitlement, substitution and swap workflows, shift templates with qualification and rest-period checks, and coverage warnings before publication.

10 — Planning and recording are one system: rosters that respect statutory rest and the works agreement, absence that reflows the plan automatically, and forecast-versus-actual reporting a team lead can act on.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Shifts brings scheduling with availability, time-off requests, swaps, drops and open shifts into one admin inbox with full visibility, and templates and recurrence for long-term rosters — the right shape for a planning tool. We found no public information on automatic vacation entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording, public-holiday calendars per location or rest-period checks in the roster, so the absence half that makes the time data mean anything is unevidenced. 7 8

Report an error

Project, cost-centre & billing

How this is scored

Whether recorded time can carry the allocation an agency, workshop or professional-services firm needs — project, task, cost centre, billable status — through to an invoice or a client report.

0 — Attendance only; no project, task or cost-centre dimension at all.

3 — A free-text note or a single project field, with no rates, no billable flag and no per-project reporting.

5 — Projects and tasks with a billable flag and per-project reports, plus a rate per person or per project.

8 — Multi-level structure (client, project, task, cost centre), rate cards by person, role and project, budget tracking with warnings, and an invoice-ready export.

10 — Time becomes revenue without re-entry: approval before billing, rate rules that survive a rate change mid-project, client-facing reports, and a maintained handoff into named accounting or invoicing systems.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

This is the vendor's strength: client, project and task dimensions, rates per person and project with dated rate history so older reports keep their original calculations, budget alerts at defined points, and invoices built from uninvoiced billable work into named systems — QuickBooks Online, Xero, FreshBooks — with the invoice status synced back. Submitted time is approved, rejected or partially approved before payroll or billing use, so the billable record is governed rather than just summed. 6 9 10 12

Report an error

Payroll handoff

How this is scored

How the recorded month reaches payroll — DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt, an in-house system or the tax adviser — and how much of it is automated rather than retyped.

0 — No payroll path stated; the month leaves as a spreadsheet someone retypes.

3 — Generic CSV said to be usable for payroll, with no named system, no defined format and no handling of surcharges.

5 — A named payroll integration or a documented export format for at least one major system, covering hours, absences and overtime.

8 — Vendor-maintained integration with a named provider, covering night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, time accounts and mid-month changes, with a lock step before transmission.

10 — Payroll is designed for, not exported to: several named systems maintained, an auditable approval and lock, retro handling for corrections after the close, and the tax adviser given their own scoped access.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The month leaves as CSV, PDF or a ZIP of team time logs, with timesheet submission and an approve-reject-lock step before the export leaves the system, and an API is offered to connect time data to payroll. But we found no public information naming a payroll system or a documented payroll format, nor on night, Sunday or holiday surcharges, so the month reaches payroll as a file someone retypes. 1 6 11 12

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where the data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are, and whether that is documented rather than assumed. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as this buyer weighs it.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting region unstated or non-EU, subprocessors not named.

3 — EU hosting offered as an option, but the contracting entity is non-EU or the subprocessor list is absent.

5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but the subprocessor chain includes non-EU providers without an explained safeguard.

8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, EU contracting entity, full subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, data-centre certification published, and an on-premises or private-cloud option for buyers who need it.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Data sits on AWS in Frankfurt and Oregon with replication across both regions, so a United States copy is standard practice rather than a documented exception with a legal basis, and attachments live on S3. The contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, a data-residency commitment and the subprocessor list are all unconfirmed on the vendor's own captured pages — I found no public information on any of them — and that is not a basis a works council can sign. 2

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual invoice for their headcount — including terminals, modules and minimums — from public pages alone.

0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.

3 — A per-user headline exists, but hardware, modules or a minimum seat count are unpriced or unmentioned.

5 — Per-user prices public for the main tiers with the billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed piece (terminal hardware, planning module, payroll export) sits in an unpriced bundle.

8 — Every tier and module priced publicly with per-user maths, billing period, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom work lacks a number.

10 — Complete price computability: a calculator or table producing the annual invoice for a given headcount and module selection, including hardware, setup and renewal terms.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The only public pricing information in the captured pages is a 14-day free trial with no credit card required, plus free calculators; a FAQ asks whether Shifts is free but the answer is not in the capture. We found no public information on per-user prices, tiers, billing periods or minimum terms, so no buyer can compute a real annual invoice from these pages. 7 11 12

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Ownership Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error

Questions about Everhour

Is Everhour European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Everhour is based.

Where does Everhour store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

Does Everhour have a free plan?

Yes. Everhour has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 20 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Everhour?

As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates TimeTac (3.5/5), clockodo (3/5) and ZEP (3/5) highest among the other 25 Time Tracking & Attendance 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 TimeTac (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Everhour alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

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.

Do you know more about Everhour? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (12)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor page everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Security / trust page — found from the homepage everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap everhour.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →