Time Tracking & Attendance
GFOS
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by GFOS mbH · www.gfos.com
Compare with ATOSS → 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 panel's verdict
GFOS is a workforce-management system whose depth is the payroll handoff. Payroll export is the strongest criterion at 7 to 8, built on certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA among over thirty payroll connections, automatic night, Sunday and holiday premium valuation, test payrolls and integrated retroactive accounting. Time capture and absence and planning both sit at a flat 7: terminals, an app and shared tablets with offline storage on one side; leave approval, differentiated sickness with certified retrieval of the electronic certificate of incapacity, and conflict-checking rosters on the other. Its clearest weakness is working time law, where scores spread from 2 to 4: lower scores found no public information on break rules, daily maximums, rest periods or retention of the record for inspection, while higher ones credit collective and works agreements stored in wage-type logic. Sovereignty sits at 3 to 4: the contracting entity is GFOS mbH in Essen, but we found no public information on hosting of time data or product subprocessors. The Base, Professional and Enterprise tiers carry no public prices.
Speaks for it
- Payroll export scored 7 to 8, on certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA among more than thirty payroll connections.
- Absence and planning scored a flat 7, joining leave approval, differentiated sickness cases and conflict-checking rosters in one connected system.
- Time capture scored a flat 7 across terminals, the app and shared tablets, with bookings stored locally during network outages and synced on return.
- Night, Sunday and holiday premiums, overtime and absences are assigned to wage types automatically from recorded times, with test payrolls and retroactive accounting.
- The contracting entity is GFOS mbH in Essen, with an Amtsgericht Essen register entry, a German VAT number, a named data protection officer and an ISO 27001 certificate.
Held against it
- Working time law scored 2 to 4; we found no public information on break rules, daily maximum hours or the eleven-hour rest period.
- We found no public information on retention of the working-time record itself or on an export built for an inspection.
- We found no public information on an audit trail showing who changed which booking, or on bulk corrections.
- Project and billing scored 4 to 6; we found no public information on rates per person or per project, or on budget tracking.
- Sovereignty scored 3 to 4; we found no public information on the hosting region for time data or on subprocessors for the product itself.
Best for
- You run German payroll through DATEV, SAP, LOGA, PAISY or VEDA and need a certified monthly handoff with retroactive accounting.
- Your teams clock in on terminals, phones or shared tablets across sites with unreliable networks.
- You plan shifts against qualifications and availabilities and want absence recording and scheduling in one connected system.
- You operate under collective and works agreements that must sit inside wage-type valuation.
Avoid if
- You must evidence break rules, daily maximum hours and the eleven-hour rest period, with the time record retained for a labour inspection.
- You bill projects from rate cards per person or per project and depend on budget overrun warnings.
- You require a stated hosting region and subprocessor list for workforce data before signing.
The scores
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
The GFOS App for iOS and Android, a Terminal App that turns any smartphone or tablet into a shared clock-in point with multi-user PIN or QR login, and booking on the time-tracking terminal give me a path for desk, workshop and field staff. Offline is a designed state — data is stored locally during network outages and synced when the server returns — and GPS capture is opt-in, though we found no public information on geofencing or the vendor stating GPS limits. Corrections run through a correction process, but we found no public information on bulk correction with an audit trail of who changed what. 4 5 8
The Payroll Officer
Terminal, mobile app and a shared tablet running as a multi-user terminal are all first-class capture paths, with offline storage that syncs when the server returns, QR-code and PIN login, and both a correction process for bookings and an approval flow for absences. I found no public information on an audit trail naming who changed which booking, and the GPS option is described as activated on demand without the vendor stating its limits — that keeps it just short of the top band. 4 5 8 7
The Works Council Advocate
Capture is documented across terminals, the GFOS app, and smartphones or tablets that can stand in as a shared terminal with multi-user login by employee ID and PIN or QR code, plus offline capture that stores locally during network outages and syncs when the server returns. Corrections run through a defined correction process rather than free editing, which I welcome. GPS recording must be explicitly activated before it is booked with the time data, but we found no public information on what the GPS record stores, who may read an individual's day, or an audit trail showing who changed what. 4 5 8
The Agency Owner
The terminal app turns a shared tablet into a clock with PIN or QR login for several employees on one device, stores data locally during network outages, and the phone app adds GPS capture with explicit activation, while stationary time clock terminals are referenced as the classic option — that covers desk, deskless and site crews in one family. Bookings can be corrected afterwards through a stated process, but we found no public information on an approval step or a trail showing who changed what, which is what separates this from the best. 4 5 8
The Field Supervisor
Offline is a designed state here, not a failure mode: bookings store locally when the server is unreachable and sync on return, any phone or tablet becomes a shared terminal with PIN or QR login for several workers on one device, and stationary terminals are named as the alternative, on top of iOS and Android apps with QR-code cost-centre switching. GPS capture is opt-in; I found no public information on its limits, and none on bulk corrections with an audit trail of who changed what. 4 5 8
The Skeptic
The Terminal App pages show a designed offline state — bookings stored locally during network outages and synced when the server returns — plus shared-device multi-user mode with PIN or QR login, and GPS recording the vendor states must be explicitly activated. Capture paths multiply across the GFOS app, a smartphone or tablet turned into a terminal, and stationary terminals referenced with QR-code clocking, while project times carry a subsequent correction process. We found no public information on bulk correction or an audit trail attributing who changed which booking. 4 5 8
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
The wage-type logic stores collective agreements, works agreements and individual working-time models, overtime is assigned automatically, and the pages claim compliance with working-time regulations in scheduling — a serious German engine under the hood. But we found no public information on break handling, on warnings for the eight- and ten-hour daily maximum or the eleven-hour rest period, or on how the time record itself is retained for an inspection, which is exactly what I must evidence since the BAG ruling. 1 6 9
The Payroll Officer
The pages show working-time models in scheduling, automatic night, Sunday and holiday premium evaluation from recorded times, and a healthcare claim of complying with working time regulations with scheduling documentation — but we found no public information on break rules, daily-maximum or 11-hour rest checks, or a retention period for the time record itself; the privacy policy's retention statements cover website, application and business correspondence data, not the recording duty. If an inspector arrives, I would be assembling the record by hand. 1 6 9 3
The Works Council Advocate
Collective agreements, works agreements and individual working-time models are stored in the wage type logic, night, Sunday and holiday premiums are assigned to wage types automatically, and retention under commercial law is stated with a yearly deletion review — real substance on the valuation side. We found no public information on break rules, warnings at the eight- and ten-hour daily maximum or the eleven-hour rest period, nor on tamper-evident entries with full change history, which is what an inspection turns on. 3 9 10
The Agency Owner
The recording machinery is rich — overtime and absences flow into wage types, collective and works agreements sit in the rules, sickness cases are differentiated — but that is payroll plumbing, not the statutory record itself. We found no public information on break rules, warnings on daily maximum hours or the eleven-hour rest period, retention of the working-time record, or an export built for an inspection; the closest statement is a general claim about complying with working time regulations in a healthcare context. 3 1 7 9
The Field Supervisor
The engine for German working-time rules is visible — collective and works agreements and individual working-time models stored in wage type logic, flextime and vacation accounts, automatic overtime and premium valuation, and a healthcare page claiming compliance with working time regulations. But I found no public information on break rules, daily maximum or rest-period checks, retention of the time record for an inspection, or tamper-evidence on entries. 1 9 10
The Skeptic
For a German vendor whose whole pitch is wage types and collective-agreement logic, we found no public information on the recording duty, break rules, rest periods or daily maximums; the closest is a healthcare claim of complying with working time regulations. Retention figures on the privacy page concern website and accounting data, and we found no public information on retention of the time record itself, change history, or an export built for an inspection. Overtime valuation, time accounts and working-time models are real infrastructure, but the ArbZG mechanics are unevidenced. 1 9 10 3
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
Sickness recording is first-class — differentiated case types, certified retrieval of the electronic certificate of incapacity, sickness-trend analytics — and vacation runs through approval workflows with quota monitoring, remaining-leave capping and up to nine vacation accounts. The roster side suits my mixed operation: availability requests via a shift doodle on mobile, a duty exchange platform, a planning book that flags conflicts, and shift suggestions matched to qualifications and time models, though we found no public information on public-holiday calendars per location or pro-rata entitlement. Schedule changes from spontaneous absences flow through the connection to attendance and absence recording. 5 6 7
The Payroll Officer
Nine vacation accounts with quota monitoring and remaining-leave capping, sickness split into initial, follow-up and work-accident cases with electronic certificate retrieval from the GKV server, a duty exchange platform with substitutes, and shift planning that matches qualifications, time models and capacities with conflict alerts during planning. We found no public information on public-holiday calendars per location, pro-rata entitlement, or rest-period checks and coverage warnings before the roster is published — that is the gap between here and the top. 7 6 5
The Works Council Advocate
Absence and planning sit in one connected system: leave requests with approval workflows and entitlement monitoring, sickness differentiated into initial notification, follow-up notification and accident at work with certified retrieval of the electronic certificate of incapacity, and scheduling that draws on the attendance data, flags planning conflicts and offers a duty exchange platform with substitutes. We found no public information on public-holiday calendars per location, pro-rata entitlement or rest-period checks in the plan. I note plainly that illness-trend analytics and an AI answering absence questions from the records are features I would want tightly scoped in a works agreement before any rollout. 6 7
The Agency Owner
Entitlements are monitored with configurable capping on remaining leave, sickness is differentiated into initial, follow-up and work-accident cases, the electronic certificate of incapacity is retrieved via certified GKV communication, and the roster side has availability doodles, shift suggestions matched on time model and qualification, a duty exchange platform and planning-conflict alerts. We found no public information on public-holiday calendars per location, pro-rata entitlement or rest checks inside shift templates, so it sits a notch below the top tier. 1 6 7
The Field Supervisor
Absence and roster are one connected system: leave via web or app with approval, sickness split into first notification, follow-up and work accident with certified eAU retrieval, entitlements monitored with remaining-leave capping, and a duty roster with a duty exchange platform, availability doodles, shift suggestions matched to qualifications and planning-conflict alerts that rework the plan when someone drops out. I found no public information on public-holiday calendars per location, pro-rata entitlement, or rest-period checks inside shift templates. 5 6 7
The Skeptic
Entitlement monitoring with up to nine vacation accounts and configurable remaining-leave capping, differentiated sickness cases with eAU and EEL handling, substitution, and a duty-exchange platform sit beside conflict warnings, qualification-matched shift suggestions and a planning book — planning and recording are visibly one connected system. We found no public information on per-location public-holiday calendars, pro-rata entitlement for part-timers, or rest-period checks before a roster is published, which is precisely the compliance-adjacent half of rostering. 5 6 7
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
Time books to projects, sub-projects, tasks, activities and locations, projects carry a billable flag, and there are target/actual comparisons, project-progress reports, deviation monitoring and an export of evaluated times for invoicing into a connected system. But we found no public information on rates, neither per person nor per project, and none on budget tracking or rate cards — so from public pages I cannot see how recorded time becomes a priced invoice. 8 10
The Payroll Officer
Bookings run to projects, sub-projects, tasks, activities, cost centres and locations with a billable flag, target/actual comparison, deviation alerts, a standard interface to a controlling system and an outbound transfer of evaluated times for invoicing. I found no public information on rates per person, role or project, nor on budget warnings or client-facing reports — and without rates, the recorded month never becomes an invoice without someone pricing it again. 8 10 5
The Works Council Advocate
Recorded time books to projects, sub-projects, tasks, activities and locations, with a billable flag, target/actual comparisons and project-progress reports, automatic messages on deviations, and a standard interface that transfers evaluated project times onward for invoicing. We found no public information on rate cards per person, role or project, and that is the piece that turns a clean record into a computable invoice for a services firm. 8
The Agency Owner
The structure is right for a services firm: projects, sub-projects, tasks, locations and cost centres, a billable flag, an activity monitor for logging in and out of tasks, automatic deviation messages when tracked hours and project bookings disagree, and evaluated project times transferred onward "for invoicing, for example". But my margin lives in rates and budgets, and we found no public information on rate cards by person, role or project, currency budgets with overrun warnings, or client-facing reports — so a month still could not be billed from these pages alone. 5 8 10
The Field Supervisor
Recorded time carries a real allocation — projects, sub-projects, tasks, activities, locations and cost centres — with a billable flag, percentage auto-bookings to master projects, automatic deviation monitoring, target/actual project reports, and a transfer of evaluated times onward for invoicing. I found no public information on rates per person or per project, or on budget tracking with warnings. 8 10
The Skeptic
Working times book to projects, sub-projects, tasks and locations with a billable flag, per-project reports, deviation monitoring, cost-centre aggregation and a defined transfer of evaluated times to another system for invoicing. We found no public information on rate cards per person, role or project, or on budget tracking with warnings — the two pieces that turn booked time into a priced invoice without re-entry. 8 10
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
Certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA — thirty payroll systems plus forty ERP connections — are vendor-maintained, with night, Sunday and holiday premiums, overtime and payroll-relevant absences assigned to wage types automatically and absences re-synchronised on cancellation or extension. Monthly transfer happens at the touch of a button, integrated retroactive accounting covers corrections after the fact, test payrolls can be run beforehand, and a neutral data-record format serves an in-house payroll; we found no public information on a lock or approval step before transmission. 9 10
The Payroll Officer
Certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA, over thirty payroll interfaces plus a neutral data-record format for anything individual; night, Sunday and holiday premiums are assigned to wage types automatically with competing wage types resolved by stored rules and priorities, absences synchronise downstream including cancellations and extensions, time and vacation accounts travel with the record, and integrated retroactive accounting catches corrections after the close, with test payrolls available before transmission. The piece I would not sign off on yet: we found no public information on an approval-and-lock step before the month is released, or on scoped access for the tax adviser. 9 10 7
The Works Council Advocate
Certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, Navision, LOGA and Veda among more than thirty payroll systems are claimed, night, Sunday and holiday surcharges are calculated automatically from recorded times, absences synchronise downstream including cancellation and extension, and integrated retroactive accounting covers corrections after the close. We found no public information on an auditable approval and lock step before transmission or on scoped access for the tax adviser, which is what separates a good handoff from a controlled one. 7 9 10
The Agency Owner
Certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA plus 24 other payroll systems, night, Sunday and holiday premiums calculated automatically from recorded times, monthly payroll data preparation at the touch of a button, test payrolls and integrated retroactive accounting — that is a genuine handoff rather than retyping, with absences synchronized to downstream systems on change. The one piece we found no public information on is a lock step before transmission. 9 10
The Field Supervisor
This is the deepest part of the offering: certified interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA among 30-plus payroll interfaces plus a neutral record format for anything else, night, Sunday and holiday premiums and overtime pushed to wage types automatically from recorded times, flextime and vacation accounts in the data record, absence changes synchronized by cancellation or extension, retroactive accounting and test payrolls before the monthly button-press transfer. I found no public information on a lock or approval step before transmission, or on scoped access for the tax adviser. 7 9 10
The Skeptic
Certified, named interfaces to DATEV, PAISY, SAP, LOGA and VEDA among over thirty payroll connections, automatic night, Sunday and holiday premiums assigned to wage types, absence synchronisation on cancellation or extension, retroactive accounting and click-through test payrolls make this the most thoroughly evidenced capability across these pages. We found no public information on an approval or lock step before the monthly transmission, or on scoped access for the tax adviser. 9 10
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
The contracting entity is clearly German — GFOS mbH in Essen, registered at the Amtsgericht Essen with a German VAT number — and the vendor presents itself as ISO 27001 certified. The only named subprocessors are website-side, including HubSpot with servers in Germany and the USA under an Art. 49 derogation and Google services; we found no public information on where the actual time data is hosted or on any subprocessor list for product hosting. 2 3 4
The Payroll Officer
The contracting entity is German to the letter — Essen register entry, German VAT number, named managing directors — with ISO 27001 certification and a privacy policy naming marketing subprocessors including HubSpot storing data on servers in Germany and the USA under an Art. 49 exception. But we found no public information on where the hosted time data resides, which data-centre provider runs it, or the product's own subprocessor chain — and for records I must defend to works council and auditor, a certificate is not a location. 2 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is solidly German — Essen address, Amtsgericht Essen register entry, German VAT number — and the website processor chain is published down to Google Ireland, CookieFirst in the Netherlands and HubSpot with servers in Germany and the USA. For the product itself we found no public information on the hosting region for time data, on product subprocessors, or on an on-premises option; and the US transfer to HubSpot rests on a GDPR exception clause for unsafe third countries rather than a named safeguard. 2 3 1
The Agency Owner
A German contracting entity in Essen with a German register court and VAT number, ISO 27001 certification and Made in Germany positioning — that is who I want to sign with. But we found no public information on where the product's data is hosted or on its subprocessor chain; the published privacy policy covers website tools, including HubSpot with storage in Germany and the USA on an Art. 49 GDPR basis, rather than the time-tracking platform itself. 2 3 1 4
The Field Supervisor
The contracting party is German to the bone — GFOS mbH in Essen, Amtsgericht Essen register, German VAT number, a named data protection officer and an ISO 27001 certificate — and the privacy policy even names its website subprocessors, including HubSpot servers in Germany and the USA under an Art. 49 derogation. I found no public information on where customer time data is hosted or on subprocessors for the product itself, and that silence is what matters when crews' clockings leave the site. 2 3 1 4
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is German — GFOS mbH in Essen, registered at the Essen court with a German VAT number — and the privacy policy names its website processors, including HubSpot with data stored in Germany and the USA under an Art. 49 derogation. We found no public information on where the workforce data itself is hosted, on a data-centre provider, or on the product's own subprocessors; "Made in Germany" and ISO 27001 certification do not state a hosting region. 2 3 1 4
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 pages name Base, Professional and Enterprise packages and mention bundles, but we found no public price of any kind — no per-user figure, no billing period, nothing for terminals or modules. Every number would come from a sales conversation, so I cannot compute my annual invoice for 200 heads from public pages. 1 7
The Payroll Officer
Base, Professional and Enterprise packages and a bundles concept are named, but we found no public information on per-user prices, terminal hardware, module pricing, minimum terms or VAT treatment. A buyer cannot compute any part of the annual invoice for their headcount from the public pages; every figure is a sales conversation. 1 7 9
The Works Council Advocate
Package names Base, Professional and Enterprise are public and bundles exist, but we found no public information on per-user prices, terminal hardware, module pricing, billing period, minimum terms or VAT treatment. A buyer cannot compute the annual invoice for any headcount from the public pages; the tiers are named and every figure is a sales conversation. 1 7
The Agency Owner
The packaging is visible — Base, Professional and Enterprise tiers plus separately named add-ons — but we found no public prices at all: no per-user figure, no billing period, and no pricing for terminal hardware, the planning module or the payroll interfaces. Procurement cannot compute an annual invoice for forty heads without a sales conversation. 1 7 9 10
The Field Supervisor
The pages name tiers from Base to Enterprise and list modules, but we found no public prices for any tier, per-user seat, module or terminal hardware. The tier names are public; the numbers are a sales conversation. 1 7 9
The Skeptic
Tier names — Base, Professional, Enterprise — and bundle language appear on the product pages, but we found no public prices at all: no per-user figure, no billing period, no hardware price for the terminals the product references, no minimum seat count, no VAT treatment. A buyer can learn that tiers exist, not what any of them costs, so nothing about the annual invoice can be computed from what is published. 1 7 9
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 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 | Incorporated in DE ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 2 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 30 Aug 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. The country is not named verbatim on the imprint; DE is derived from the German register court (Amtsgericht Essen) and the DE VAT identification number.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. 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 could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- 19 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. Know more? Tell us
- 5 integrations 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. Know more? Tell us
- 4 legal 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. Know more? Tell us
- 3 hosting 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. Know more? Tell us
- 2 subprocessors 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. Know more? Tell us
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.gfos.com Checked 17 Sep 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
- 2 Imprint www.gfos.com Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.gfos.com Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.gfos.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →