Time Tracking & Attendance
ProTime
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by ProTime nv · www.protime.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.
ProTime at a glance
- Vendor
- ProTime nv
- 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
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates ProTime 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. ProTime nv, in workforce management since 1995 and part of the SD Worx Group, scores highest on absence and planning and on payroll export, both at 4 to 5, with time capture at a flat 4. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 20 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 21 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
ProTime nv, in workforce management since 1995 and part of the SD Worx Group, scores highest on absence and planning and on payroll export, both at 4 to 5, with time capture at a flat 4. Shift planning that combines availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements is the best-evidenced capability, and the pages state that validated time and absence data flows into payroll, HR and ERP systems without re-entry, through a native payroll link inside the SD Worx Group. The weakest marks are working time law at 2 to 3, where hours managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules rests on one sentence with no break, rest, retention or inspection mechanics, and project and billing at 0 to 1, where no project, cost-centre or billable dimension appears. Sovereignty spans 3 to 4: EU hosting is stated and ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and ISAE reports are published, but no subprocessor is named. flagged splits came back clear; the small spreads reflect differing credit for the SD Worx payroll link and the stated certifications. No prices appear on the captured pages.
Speaks for it
- Shift planning combines availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements into one plan — absence and planning scored 4 to 5
- Validated time and absence data is stated to flow into payroll, HR and ERP systems without re-entry, with working time connected natively to payroll across Europe through the SD Worx Group — payroll export scored 4 to 5
- Automatic recording from terminal, app and browser, with terminals and access control from one supplier under one contract and one support line — time capture scored a flat 4
- EU hosting is stated, backed by GDPR, NIS2-readiness, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification and ISAE 3402 Type I and ISAE 3000 Type I reports — sovereignty scored 3 to 4
Held against it
- No project, task, cost-centre, billable, rate or invoice-ready dimension appears in the captured material — project and billing scored 0 to 1
- Working-time-rule management rests on a single sentence, with no break, rest-period, daily-maximum, retention or inspection-ready export shown — working time law scored 2 to 3
- We found no public information on offline capture, geofenced check-in, or a correction-and-approval workflow for recorded hours
- No payroll system or export format is named, and no surcharge handling or lock step before transmission is shown, including German systems such as DATEV
- The contracting entity's jurisdiction is not confirmed on the vendor's own captured pages and no subprocessor is named
Best for
- You run shift-based teams in construction, healthcare, hotels or manufacturing and need planning that blends availability, skills, contracted hours and legal requirements
- You want validated time and absence data to reach your existing payroll, HR or ERP systems without re-entry, with a native payroll link through the SD Worx Group
- You need hardware terminals and access control alongside the software, sharing one database under one contract and one support line
- You are a large enterprise or international company deploying for 100 to 5,000 employees with a stated EU-hosting posture
Avoid if
- You bill recorded time to clients and need projects, cost centres, billable status, rates or an invoice-ready export — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You must put a working-time record in front of an inspection, with break, rest-period, retention and export mechanics documented up front
- Your works council or data-protection review requires a named subprocessor list and a confirmed contracting entity before approving employee time data
- Your crews record time where connectivity drops and you need offline capture and supervisor corrections evidenced before signing — the pages name the capture paths but nothing around them
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Capture in the real workplace | 2 of 5 |
| Working-time law & audit record | 1 of 5 |
| Absence & shift planning | 2 of 5 |
| Project, cost-centre & billing | 0 of 5 |
| Payroll handoff | 2.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2 of 5 |
Capture in the real workplace
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
Terminal, app and browser capture is stated outright, with terminals from the vendor's own hardware line, which names a path for each of my desk, workshop and field groups. But we found no public information on offline capture, GPS or geofenced check-in, or any correction-and-approval workflow, which decides whether a crew with no signal is actually covered. Three capture points named, nothing around them evidenced. 1
The Payroll Officer
The captured pages show automatic recording from a terminal, app or browser, with terminals and access control sold as hardware and software from one supplier — three real capture paths including hardware, which is more than a desk timer. I found no public information on offline capture, on a correction workflow with approval, or on any record of who changed a booking, so I cannot credit it past the middle. 1
The Works Council Advocate
Terminals, an app and browser capture are all named, and hardware and software come from one supplier, so several capture paths exist including a shared terminal. We found no public information on offline behaviour, on what GPS or geofenced check-in stores and who can read it, or on a correction workflow where every change is attributable and reversible. 1
The Agency Owner
Terminal, app and browser capture are all confirmed, with hardware and access control from the same supplier sharing one database — desk people and site crews both get a way to record. We found no public information on offline capture, GPS or geofenced check-in, or a correction workflow with an audit trail, which is what would make capture dependable rather than just broad. 1
The Field Supervisor
Terminal, app and browser recording with hardware terminals from one supplier is the right kit for a site, and access control runs on the same database. But we found no public information on what happens when the network drops, and none on how a foreman corrects a bad punch — no offline story and no correction workflow are shown anywhere. 1
The Skeptic
The pages name terminal, app and browser capture, with terminals sold as hardware from the same supplier — the shared capture point a shift workforce needs. We found no public information on offline capture, a correction-and-approval workflow, or geofenced check-in, so only the breadth of capture paths is evidenced, not what happens offline or on correction. 1
Working-time law & audit record
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
Hours managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules is more than a raw sum, and the eight-country support line hints at labour-rule knowledge. But we found no public information on break handling, the daily maximum, rest periods, retention or an inspection-ready export, and nothing names the German recording duty. A promise with no mechanics, and I buy on mechanics. 1
The Payroll Officer
Hours are said to be managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules, which is more than a bare sum of hours. But the pages name no break rule, no daily maximum, no rest period and no retention period, and I found no public information on anything a German inspection would ask for — so this stands on one sentence. 1
The Works Council Advocate
Hours are said to be managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules, which is more than a bare sum, yet nothing names break handling, daily maxima, eleven-hour rest or a retention period. We found no public information on German-law treatment, tamper-evident change history or an export built for an inspection. 1
The Agency Owner
Recording is said to be managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules, which is more than raw summed hours. But nothing captured here is German-specific: we found no public information on break or rest-period checks, daily maximum hours, a stated retention period, or an export built for an inspection. 1
The Field Supervisor
Hours are said to be managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules, which is more than a clock that sums hours. But we found no public information on break enforcement, daily maximum or rest-period checks, retention of the record, or any export shaped for an inspection — for a German buyer that record has to stand on its own when someone official asks for it. 1
The Skeptic
The claim is that hours are "managed against contract, collective agreement and working-time rules" — a slogan, not a feature list. We found no public information on break rules, daily maximums, rest periods, retention, or an export built for an inspection, and for a German buyer the BAG recording duty and § 3 ArbSchG go unmentioned entirely. 1
Absence & shift planning
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
Shift planning is the best-evidenced thing on the page: availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements combined into one plan. We found no public information on entitlement calculation, carry-over, sickness recording or per-location holiday calendars, so the absence half rests on a single phrase about absence data flowing to payroll. 1
The Payroll Officer
Planning is evidenced in real detail: availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements combined into a plan, and absence data is said to flow through to payroll. I found no public information on entitlement calculation, carry-over, sickness recording or substitution and swap workflows, so the absence half of this criterion rests on a single phrase. 1
The Works Council Advocate
Planning is real: availability, skills, aptitudes, contracted hours and legal requirements are combined into a plan, and validated absence data is said to flow to payroll. We found no public information on entitlement calculation, carry-over, sickness recording or swap and substitution workflows — the half of attendance the works council actually co-governs. 1
The Agency Owner
The planning half is genuinely evidenced — availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements combined into a plan — and absence data is said to flow validated into payroll. We found no public information on entitlement calculation, carry-over, sickness recording or substitution and swap workflows, so the absence half rests on a passing mention. 1
The Field Supervisor
Shift planning that combines availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements is real rostering, and absence data is said to flow through to payroll. But we found no public information on vacation entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording or an absence calendar — the absence half of the pair is barely documented. 1
The Skeptic
Shift planning is described concretely — availability, skills, aptitudes, preferences, contracted hours and legal requirements — but the absence half rests on one phrase about absence data flowing to payroll. We found no public information on vacation entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, per-location holiday calendars, or substitution and swap workflows. 1
Project, cost-centre & billing
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
The platform summary names time tracking, workforce planning and access control, and we found no public information on projects, tasks, cost centres, billable status, rates or any billing export. For my workshop quoting jobs, nothing here allocates recorded time to work. 1
The Payroll Officer
I found no public information on projects, tasks, cost centres, billable status, rate cards or any path to an invoice or client report. The captured pages describe time tracking, planning and access control for construction, finance, healthcare, hotels and manufacturing — a buyer who bills time from this evidence has nothing to go on. 1
The Works Council Advocate
Every confirmed statement concerns attendance, planning and access control; we found no public information on a project, task or cost-centre dimension, billable status, rates or any invoice-ready output. 1
The Agency Owner
This is the dealbreaker for an agency: the platform is presented as time tracking, workforce planning and access control, and we found no public information on projects, tasks, cost centres, billable flags, rate cards, budgets or an invoice-ready export. Hours that cannot carry a client number are attendance, not revenue. 1
The Field Supervisor
The platform is presented as time tracking, workforce planning and access control, and we found no public information on projects, tasks, cost centres, billable status or rates, let alone a per-project report or an invoice-ready export. Nothing in the captured material lets an agency or workshop allocate recorded time to a client. 1
The Skeptic
The captured pages describe time tracking, workforce planning and access control; no project, task, cost-centre or billable dimension appears in them. We found no public information on rates, budgets, or an invoice-ready export, so for an agency or professional-services buyer there is nothing to evaluate. 1
Payroll handoff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
A native payroll link through the SD Worx parent group, plus a general statement that validated time and absence data connects to payroll, HR and ERP systems without re-entry, is on the page. But we found no public information on named payroll systems, export formats, night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, or a lock-and-approve step before the month closes. Promising parentage, unproven handoff. 1
The Payroll Officer
The month is claimed to reach payroll natively — working time connected natively to payroll across Europe as part of the SD Worx Group, with validated time and absence data flowing without re-entry and no month-end reconciliation — which is a named payroll organisation behind the handoff and more than a CSV. But I found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, time accounts, a lock step before transmission, or corrections arriving after the close, so I stop at the middle anchor. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The pages claim validated time and absence data flows through without re-entry into payroll, HR and ERP systems, and the vendor is part of the SD Worx Group with working time connected natively to payroll across Europe. No payroll system is named, and we found no public information on surcharge handling, time-account transfer or a lock step before transmission. 1
The Agency Owner
Part of the SD Worx Group with working time connected natively to payroll across Europe, plus connectors to the payroll, HR and ERP systems a buyer already uses, with validated time and absence data flowing through without re-entry — that is a named payroll path covering hours and absence. We found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, a lock step before transmission, or corrections after the close. 1
The Field Supervisor
The vendor says validated time and absence data flows straight into the payroll, HR and ERP systems a buyer already uses — no re-entry, no month-end reconciliation — and working time is connected natively to payroll across Europe through their own group. But we found no public information on named target systems, documented formats, surcharge handling or a lock step before transmission. 1
The Skeptic
"Connects to the payroll, HR and ERP systems you already use" with "no re-entry" is the right promise, and the SD Worx parent supplies one plausible named payroll connection. But no payroll system or format is named on the page, and we found no public information on surcharges, time-account handoff, a lock step before transmission, or German systems such as DATEV. 1
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
EU hosting is stated, the address is Mechelen in Belgium, and ISO 27001:2022 plus ISAE assurance reports are published, which is a decent posture on the surface. But the contracting entity is not confirmed, and we found no public information on subprocessors or where each one processes. European and certified, with the chain under the vendor undocumented. 1
The Payroll Officer
The captured pages state hosting in the EU, GDPR and NIS2-readiness, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification with ISAE assurance reports, and give a Belgian address with offices in eight European countries. The contracting entity's jurisdiction is not confirmed on the vendor's own captured pages, and I found no public information on subprocessors, so the chain remains assumed rather than documented. 1
The Works Council Advocate
A Belgian address, EU hosting and ISO/ISAE certifications are published, which is a start. But no data-centre provider or subprocessor is named, the contracting entity's jurisdiction is not confirmed on the captured pages, and we found no public information on an on-premises option — for employee time data, that gap must close before any approval. 1
The Agency Owner
EU hosting is stated outright, backed by ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification and ISAE assurance reports, and the vendor shows a Belgian address within a European group. We found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction and none on a published subprocessor list, so the chain is asserted rather than documented. 1
The Field Supervisor
EU hosting is stated outright, the vendor's address is Mechelen in Belgium, and ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification with ISAE reports sits behind it. But we found no public information confirming the contracting entity, and not a single subprocessor is named — for a European buyer that chain has to be on paper, not assumed. 1
The Skeptic
EU hosting is stated outright, the address is Mechelen in Belgium, and ISO 27001 with ISAE reports is published — more than most marketing pages give. The parts a contract turns on are absent: we found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction, the data-centre provider, or a single named subprocessor. 1
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Operations Lead
The captured page carries no prices at all: no per-user figure, no module pricing, and we found no public information on terminal hardware pricing even though terminals are part of the offer. Every number is a sales conversation, which for a 200-head operation buying kiosks is the worst case. 1
The Payroll Officer
I found no public information on prices: no per-user figure, no tier structure, no billing period, no minimum, and no price for the terminals the vendor itself sells. For a deployment of 100 to 5,000 employees, every number on the real annual invoice will come out of a sales conversation. 1
The Works Council Advocate
We found no public prices at all — no tier, per-user figure, billing period or hardware price — only that terminals and software come under one contract and one support line. Every cost is a sales conversation. 1
The Agency Owner
We found no public prices at all: no per-user figure, no tiers, no billing period, and nothing on terminals, modules or minimum seats. For a vendor selling hardware and software under one contract, every number is a sales conversation. 1
The Field Supervisor
No price appears anywhere in the captured material — no per-user figure, no tier, no billing period, nothing on terminals or minimum seats. A buyer cannot compute even a rough annual invoice from public pages; we found no public information on pricing at all. 1
The Skeptic
We found no public information on price at all: no per-user figure, no billing period, and no cost for the terminals the vendor sells alongside the software. With hardware in the offer and a 100-to-5,000-employee product, every tier is a sales conversation and nothing can be computed. 1
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 ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about ProTime
Is ProTime European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where ProTime is based.
Where does ProTime store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.
Does ProTime have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to ProTime?
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: ProTime alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 20 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, Data residency. 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.
- We found no public information on pricing on the pages we read (protime.eu). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 1 product fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (1)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Security / trust page — found from the homepage www.protime.eu Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →