whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Time Tracking & Attendance

ProTime

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 ProTime nv · www.protime.com

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

Link to this page

ProTime: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai ProTime: 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.

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

ProTime alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Agency Owner

Weighted verdict

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.

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

Scored by The Agency Owner

Panel median The Agency Owner 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 Agency Owner
Capture in the real workplace 2 of 5 2 of 5
Working-time law & audit record 1 of 5 1 of 5
Absence & shift planning 2 of 5 2 of 5
Project, cost-centre & billing 0 of 5 0 of 5
Payroll handoff 2.5 of 5 2.5 of 5
European sovereignty 2 of 5 2 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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 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

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 — 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

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 ProTime? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (1)

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

  1. 1 Security / trust page — found from the homepage www.protime.eu Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →