whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Time Tracking & Attendance

TimeTac

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

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

by TimeTac GmbH · www.timetac.com

Compare with Papershift → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

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

The Skeptic

Weighted verdict

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.

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

Scored by The Skeptic

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 Skeptic

Four capture paths are real — web, offline-capable iOS/Android apps with GPS/NFC, and three named RFID/fingerprint terminals at published prices — and corrections are a self-service workflow with optional supervisor approval, not an admin task. But the evidence never says a terminal works offline, never states the limits of GPS positioning, and shows no bulk correction or audit trail of who changed what, which is what separates this from an 8. 1 2 4

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 Skeptic

The compliance claim is naked: 'rechtskonform' to EuGH and BAG with not one feature named to make it true — no configurable break rules, no 8/10-hour or 11-hour rest checks, no retention period, no change history anywhere in the evidence. 'Rechtssicher Arbeits- und Pausenzeit erfassen' is capture, not enforcement; working time models with Sollstunden and Zuschlagssätzen are payroll scaffolding, not ArbZG checks. 1 2

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 Skeptic

The leave module genuinely earns its keep — automatic saldo calculation, carry-over or expiry, sickness, deputies and international holiday templates. But there is no rostering anywhere in the three named modules, and the deputy rules forward requests during absence rather than substituting shifts — the planning half of this criterion simply does not exist in the evidence. 1 2

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 Skeptic

Project time is a first-class module with order and project booking, access rights and per-project reports in real time, which clears the single-field floor. But the evidence is silent on billable flags, rates, cost centres, budgets and any invoice or accounting handoff — the recorded time stops at the report and never becomes revenue. 1 2

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 Skeptic

A named, vendor-run DATEV transfer 'ganz ohne manuellen Export' clears the named-system bar, with Excel/PDF/CSV and an API as fallback. What the evidence never shows is what actually travels — hours, absences, overtime, surcharges are all unspecified — nor any lock or approval step before transmission. 1 2

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 Skeptic

The Austrian entity checks out — register court, number and VAT in Graz — with EU-only hosting, German primary region and ISO 27001 certification. But the data-centre operator is never named, ownership is unknown, and no subprocessor list exists in the evidence; 'further server locations in EU countries' is marketing copy, not documentation, and there is no on-premises escape hatch. 1 3 5

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 Skeptic

The pricing page does per-user, per-product maths with monthly and annual totals, states net pricing, and puts real numbers on all three Evo terminals. But minimum contract term is never stated, and the API, onboarding and — critically — the DATEV interface are all 'price on request': a buyer can price the seats and the clocks, not the complete annual invoice. 4

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

2 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 EU only ⚠ unverified 3/3 pts 3 Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined — uncited Report an error

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 TimeTac? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (17)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.timetac.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Time recording www.timetac.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy www.timetac.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Pricing www.timetac.com Checked 21 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Imprint www.timetac.com Checked 21 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Pricing www.timetac.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Imprint www.timetac.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap help.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap www.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap support.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap help.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap support.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap www.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap support.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  16. 16 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  17. 17 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.timetac.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →