# Mitrefinch — Time Tracking & Attendance

Mitrefinch by Mitrefinch Ltd holds a panel rating of 1.5/5 from 6 AI judges (category median 2.5/5), as of 2026-11-04. Provenance: provenance unknown; sovereignty: not determined.

- Vendor: Mitrefinch Ltd (https://www.mitrefinch.com)
- Category: [Time Tracking & Attendance](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking.md)
- Provenance (editorial classification): provenance unknown
- Canonical page: https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/mitrefinch
- Alternatives: https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/mitrefinch/alternatives ([markdown](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/mitrefinch/alternatives.md))
- Data as of: 2026-11-04 · evaluated 2026-11-04 · oldest source captured 2026-11-03

**AI-generated.** Every score, rationale and verdict here is written by a panel of AI judges from public evidence — an analysis, not a hands-on test. Every fact quotes the vendor page it was read from. No score can be bought. How scores are made: https://whats-best.ai/methodology

## At a glance

- Vendor: Mitrefinch Ltd
- Headquarters: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Data hosting: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Free plan: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026

## The panel's verdict

Mitrefinch, acquired by OneAdvanced, sells a cloud-based Time and Attendance product scoped as time tracking, absence management and rostering, alongside its own HMRC-recognised payroll. Scoring is strongest on payroll export at 4-5: the in-house payroll with automated pay cycles, payslip access and pay rate control gives recorded hours a destination inside one suite, though we found no public information on the handoff — surcharges, lock steps, formats such as DATEV. Absence and planning scores sit at 3: the module names are present, but entitlements, sickness, holiday calendars and coverage checks are not. Weakest are project and billing and sovereignty, both at 0, with no public information on project or client dimensions and no sovereignty attributes on record. Working time law scores range 0-2: higher scores credit working time being recorded at all; lower ones found no public information on breaks, rest rules, retention or the German recording duty. Time capture scores 2-3, with no public information on clock-in methods, terminals or offline capture. The captured page shows no prices; buying runs through consultants and a demo.

**Speaks for it:**
- Payroll export is the bench's strongest area at 4-5, with the vendor's own HMRC-recognised payroll as an in-house destination for recorded hours.
- Automated pay cycles, payslip access and pay rate control are stated for the payroll product.
- Absence management and rostering are both named in the product's stated scope, holding absence and planning scores at 3.
- A demo can be booked through expert consultants, and support is named as case logging and live chat.

**Held against it:**
- Project and billing scores sit at 0, with no public information on projects, clients, cost centres, billable status or client reporting.
- Sovereignty scores sit at 0: no sovereignty attributes are on record, and hosting location, contracting entity, subprocessors and a data processing agreement are all unpublished.
- We found no public information on how time is captured — clock-in paths, terminals, mobile or offline capture, and correction workflows are all undescribed.
- The only compliance recognition named is HMRC on the payroll side, a UK tax authority; we found no public information on break and rest rules, retention or the German recording duty.
- Beyond the module names, we found no public information on entitlement balances, sickness recording, holiday calendars, substitution workflows or coverage checks.

**Best for:**
- You run UK payroll and want recorded hours to land in the vendor's own HMRC-recognised payroll rather than a third-party system.
- You want time tracking, absence management and rostering named together in a single cloud workforce management product.
- You track attendance for internal operations rather than for client billing or project costing.

**Avoid if:**
- You bill time to client projects, cost centres or billable rates — project and billing scores sit at 0.
- You must evidence German working-time-law compliance from public documentation — working time law scores range 0-2, and break, rest and retention rules are publicly undocumented.
- You need sovereignty facts — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it

## Scores by judge and criterion

Scores out of 5, each judge scoring independently against the published rubric (v2). "n/r" = not rated: the vendor publishes no price, or the judge found no public information on that criterion.

| Criterion | The Operations Lead | The Payroll Officer | The Works Council Advocate | The Agency Owner | The Field Supervisor | The Skeptic |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Capture in the real workplace | 1.5/5 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1.5/5 | 1/5 | 1/5 |
| Working-time law & audit record | 1/5 | n/r | n/r | n/r | 1/5 | n/r |
| Absence & shift planning | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 |
| Project, cost-centre & billing | n/r | n/r | n/r | 0/5 | n/r | n/r |
| Payroll handoff | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2.5/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 |
| European sovereignty | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r |
| Pricing transparency | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r |
| **Weighted verdict** | **1.5/5** | **1.5/5** | **—** | **1/5** | **1.5/5** | **—** |

### The judges

- **The Operations Lead** (v1.0): Runs a 200-person operation with office, workshop and field staff, and has to record all of them since the BAG ruling. Wants capture that fits each of those groups and a roster that reflects reality. Unmoved by a beautiful desktop timer that half the workforce cannot use.
- **The Payroll Officer** (v1.0): Turns the recorded month into an payroll run and answers for it. Cares about surcharges for night, Sunday and holiday work, time accounts that reconcile, and corrections that arrive after the close. Treats "export to CSV" as an admission that the handoff was never designed.
- **The Works Council Advocate** (v1.0): 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.
- **The Agency Owner** (v1.0): Bills forty people's hours to clients and lives on the gap between recorded and billable. Wants project structure, rate cards that survive a mid-project change, budget warnings before the overrun, and an export the invoicing system takes. Attendance compliance is the floor, not the product.
- **The Field Supervisor** (v1.0): Supervises crews on sites with no reliable signal and no desks. Judges everything by whether it works in a basement at 6am: offline capture, a shared terminal, corrections a foreman can make without a support ticket. A cloud-only app is a tool that will be filled in from memory on Friday.
- **The Skeptic** (v1.0): Has read a great many pages claiming to be "BAG-konform" and wants to know which feature makes that true. Reads compliance claims for what they do not say: which module, at which tier, and whether the terminal in the photograph costs extra.

## European sovereignty — proven facts

No sovereignty finding yet.

## Key facts

Each fact is the vendor's own statement, cited to the source page it was read from ([S*n*] → Sources).

**Legal**
- Ownership: acquired · OneAdvanced [S1]

**Product**
- Payroll: Payroll · HMRC-recognised [S1]
- Payroll scope: automated pay cycles · payslip access · pay rate control · compliance · reporting [S1]
- Time attendance: Time and Attendance · workforce management software · cloud [S1]
- Time attendance scope: time tracking · absence management · rostering [S1]

**Support**
- Channels: case logging · live chat [S1]
- Sales demo: yes [S1]

## Questions

### Is Mitrefinch European?

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

### Where does Mitrefinch store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

### Does Mitrefinch have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

### What are the best alternatives to Mitrefinch?

As of 4 Nov 2026, the panel rates [TimeTac (3.5/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/timetac), [clockodo (3/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/clockodo) and [GFOS (3/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/zeiterfassung-vom-hofe) highest among the other 27 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](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/timetac) (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: [how scores are made](https://whats-best.ai/methodology#ordering). The full list, with European products first: [Mitrefinch alternatives](https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/mitrefinch/alternatives).

## What this page leaves out

- We found no public information on pricing on the pages we read (mitrefinch.com). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page.
- We could not confirm any compliance information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind.
- 2 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.

## Sources

- [S1] Vendor page: https://www.mitrefinch.com (checked 2026-11-03)

---

Cite as: whats-best.ai, "Mitrefinch — Time Tracking & Attendance", AI panel analysis, as of 2026-11-04. https://whats-best.ai/software/time-tracking/mitrefinch

Corrections: https://whats-best.ai/correct/1511?target=page