whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Time Tracking & Attendance

Time Doctor

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 Time Doctor LLC · timedoctor.com

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

Link to this page

Time Doctor: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Time Doctor: 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.

Time Doctor at a glance

Vendor
Time Doctor LLC
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
Starting price
“Then keep Time Doctor for as little as $6.70 per user/month.” (vendor’s words) source, captured 13 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Time Doctor 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Time Doctor is a time tracking and attendance product from Time Doctor LLC. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources

Time Doctor 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 0.5 of 5 0.5 of 5
Absence & shift planning 1.5 of 5 1 of 5
Project, cost-centre & billing 2 of 5 2 of 5
Payroll handoff 2.5 of 5 2 of 5
European sovereignty 0 of 5 0.5 of 5
Pricing transparency 0 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

Offline capture is genuinely designed rather than a failure state — tracked data sits in local storage and syncs automatically when the connection returns, across computers, tablets and mobiles, with manual entry as a fallback. What I cannot find is a shared terminal or badge point for site and shift crews, and no public information that a correction carries a name, a reason and a reversal. Being able to switch verification features on or off per role is the right instinct, but the capture paths here serve desk workers first. 1 2 8

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

For a product that lists attendance and imports work schedules, I found no public information on break rules, the eight- and ten-hour daily maximums, the eleven-hour rest period, retention of the record, or any statement about the German recording duty after the 2022 labour-court decision. The record this produces would not survive an inspection, and it would not survive a co-determination negotiation with me either. Screenshots, activity scores and an unusual-activity report are monitoring, not a statutory working-time record. 1 4

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

Work schedules can be set up via CSV import and attendance sits on the feature list, which is a step beyond a separate spreadsheet. Beyond that I found no public information on vacation entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording, holiday calendars or a roster with coverage checks; the captured leave-tracking pages contribute no confirmed capability. I score what is visible, and what is visible is thin. 1 4

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

The projects report analyzes time per project and per user, filters for unassigned time and exports in CSV, XLS and PDF — that is real allocation, not a free-text note. But I found no public information on a billable flag, rates per person or project, budget tracking or an invoice-ready export; hours you can hand straight to payroll and billing is a promise, not a structure. Batch payments and salary or hourly setup gesture at billing without evidencing the rate rules a professional-services firm would actually need. 1 6 8

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

Direct integrations to named payroll platforms are real — Rippling and Xero AU appear, though the captured pages give different lists that also mix in PayPal, Payoneer and TransferWise, which are payment services rather than payroll systems. Timesheets can be approved manually or set to approve automatically, with configurable pay periods and currencies. I found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, a lock step before transmission, or any German payroll path such as DATEV — for a workforce under collective agreements, that silence decides the score. 1 8

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

The record shows no sovereignty attributes at all: no hosting region, no data-centre provider, no subprocessor list, no EU contracting entity — only Time Doctor LLC and servers that sync somewhere unstated. A product that takes screenshots and activity data and offers an MCP connection into external AI assistants, while naming none of its processors, is not something I could clear in a works agreement. I found no public information on where our employees' data would live or who could read an individual's day. 1

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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

No public prices for any plan appear in the record; the only pricing-adjacent fact is a free trial with no credit card required. A buyer cannot compute an annual invoice for their headcount from these pages, and I found no public information on tiers, per-user maths, billing periods or hardware costs. 8

Report an error

Questions about Time Doctor

Is Time Doctor European?

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

Where does Time Doctor store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.

Does Time Doctor have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Time Doctor?

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: Time Doctor 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 Time Doctor? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (9)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap help.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap support.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap support.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap support.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap help.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap support.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap support.timedoctor.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →