Time Tracking & Attendance
ZEP
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by provantis IT Solutions GmbH · www.zep.de
Compare with clockodo → 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
ZEP, a project time-tracking product from provantis IT Solutions GmbH, scored strongest on project and billing, at 7-8, where a billable flag on every booking, price-group rates and automated invoicing into XRechnung and ZUGFeRD with DATEV and Lexware exports are documented. Time capture clusters at 7 — browser, two app lines and a hardware terminal, with offline stamping that syncs automatically. Working time law is the weakest criterion at 4: "Gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen" is marketed, but we found no public information on daily maximum-hour warnings, eleven-hour rest-period checks, a retention period or a tamper-evident change history. The genuine split is sovereignty, spread 4 to 6: the vendor states hosting and development in Germany with daily backups in several German data centres and ISO 27001 covering ZEP and its cloud hosting partners, yet the captured pages name two entities — ZEP GmbH in the copyright, provantis IT Solutions GmbH as vendor — and we found no public information on a subprocessor list or named data-centre provider. Payroll export scores 5-6 with named DATEV, LODAS and Personio links but documented exports covering travel expenses, not wage types.
Speaks for it
- Project and billing is the strongest criterion at 7-8, with a billable flag on every booking, price-group rates per project and employee, and automated invoicing into XRechnung and ZUGFeRD 2.1 with DATEV and Lexware exports.
- Capture covers browser, two app lines and a hardware terminal, with offline bookings stored locally and synced automatically — time capture scores 7.
- Absence is documented in depth — pro-rata vacation entitlement with a worked example, sickness with certificates, approval by department managers with email notification, and read-only closed months — absence and planning scores 6.
- All three tiers carry public per-user prices with monthly billing — "Ab 2€ pro User", "Ab 7€ pro User", "Ab 18€ pro User" — plus a free, non-binding 14-day trial and no onboarding costs.
- Named payroll links exist: DATEV synchronisation for Lohn & Gehalt and LODAS, and transfer of ZEP time bookings to Personio.
Held against it
- Working time law scores 4 — "Gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen" is marketed, but we found no public information on daily maximum-hour warnings, eleven-hour rest-period checks, a retention period or a tamper-evident change history.
- Administrators can edit employee times, but we found no public information on a correction workflow with an audit trail of who changed what.
- Documented exports cover travel expenses to accounting rather than wage types, and we found no public information on how night, Sunday or holiday surcharges reach payroll.
- Add-on modules and terminals carry no public prices, and teams above 25, 50 or 100 users depending on tier move to individual offers.
- We found no public information naming the cloud hosting partners behind the stated German data centres, or on a subprocessor list.
Best for
- You run a consultancy or professional-services firm billing project time by hourly and daily rates, with automated invoicing into XRechnung, ZUGFeRD, DATEV or Lexware.
- Your workforce spans desk and site and needs browser, mobile-app and terminal capture with offline stamping.
- You need documented absence workflows: pro-rata entitlement, sickness with certificates, approval statuses with notification, and month-end locking.
- You are smaller than 25 users on ZEP Professional, 50 on ZEP Compact or 100 on ZEP Clock and want computable public per-user prices.
Avoid if
- You must hand an inspector documented daily maximum and eleven-hour rest-period checks, a retention period and a tamper-evident change history — we found no public information on these.
- You need a documented wage-type mapping for night, Sunday or holiday surcharges before signing — we found no public information on what the payroll export carries.
- You run shift-based rostering — the planning shown is capacity scheduling in hours, percentages and time slots, and we found no public information on shift templates or swap workflows.
- You need your annual invoice computed from public pages at sizes above 25, 50 or 100 users depending on tier, where pricing becomes an individual offer.
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
This is what I run an operation on, and the capture breadth holds up: browser, a mobile app for iOS and Android with offline storage that syncs when the connection returns, a tablet multi-user mode that simulates a terminal, and a separate hardware terminal, with GPS documented per stamp event and the vendor stating plainly that this does not restrict stamping to a fixed radius. What decides the deduction is corrections: the help pages show an administrator mode where times are edited, and I found no public information on a correction workflow with approval or on an audit trail of who changed a stamped time. 1 5 6
The Payroll Officer
Web, two mobile apps and a genuine hardware terminal are all on the record, with offline stamping that stores locally and syncs, and GPS documented per stamp with the vendor openly stating it does not fence a fixed radius. What I miss is the correction side: times are edited in an admin mode, and I found no public information on bulk correction or any trail of who changed what. 1 5 6
The Works Council Advocate
Browser, the app in single- and multi-user mode and a separate hardware terminal cover desk, deskless and site crews, with bookings stored locally offline and synced when the connection returns. GPS is off by default, records a position only per stamp event, and the vendor states plainly that it documents where a stamp came from rather than fencing a radius — the honest answer a works council needs. We found no public information on an audit trail for corrections: administrators can edit times, but nothing public says who changed what, when, or whether a change is reversible. 1 5 6
The Agency Owner
Browser, two app lines and a hardware terminal — plus a tablet multi-user mode that simulates a terminal — cover desk and site crews, with offline times and receipts stored locally and synced automatically, and GPS per stamp where the vendor itself states stamping is not restricted to a fixed radius. Admin-mode editing and the option to disable manual entry give control, but I found no public information on bulk corrections with an audit trail of who changed what. 1 5 6
The Field Supervisor
The Clock App punches in single-user and multi-user modes where a tablet on site simulates a terminal with PIN logins, there is a separate hardware terminal, and bookings made offline sit on the device and sync the moment signal returns — kit a foreman can run in a stairwell at 6am. Location is GPS per stamp event with the vendor plainly stating it does not restrict stamping to a fixed radius, and an administrator can edit times on the device itself. We found no public information on an audit trail showing who corrected what after the fact. 1 5 6
The Skeptic
Browser, two app lines and a hardware terminal are all named, and both apps document offline capture that syncs automatically; GPS per stamp event is documented with the explicit note that it does not restrict stamping to a fixed radius — the vendor saying what the feature does not do. What I miss is the correction side: the help pages show an administrator mode that edits employee times, and I found no public information on a correction workflow with approval, bulk correction, or an audit trail of who changed what. 1 5 6
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
Individual working-time models and break rules per employee are documented, with an automatic overtime account, capping and per-employee settings, and the vendor markets 'Gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen' and minute-precise, legally compliant tracking. For a record I may have to hand to an inspector, I found no public information on warnings for the eight or ten-hour daily maximum, the eleven-hour rest period, a stated retention period, tamper-evident change history, or an export built for an inspection. 1 2 7 8
The Payroll Officer
Individual working-time models and break rules per employee are evidenced, an automatic overtime account runs off the defined regular hours, and closed absence months are read-only — a real lock. But the captured pages never show the eight and ten-hour daily maximum, the eleven-hour rest period or any retention statement, and "gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen" is a claim rather than a documented check; I also found no public information on change history or tamper-evidence for the record itself. 1 7 8 9
The Works Council Advocate
Individual working-time models, configurable break rules, minute-exact stamps, automatic overtime accounting with capping and travel time captured as project time give the record a lawful shape, and legally compliant settings are advertised. But we found no public information on warnings for the daily maximum or the eleven-hour rest period, on any retention period, or on tamper-evident change history for entries. That gap is exactly what an inspection would ask about. 1 5 7 8
The Agency Owner
Configurable break rules and individual working-time models per employee, an automatic overtime account with capping and holiday time supplements, and 'gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen' in the Clock tier give me the compliance floor. I found no public information on 8/10-hour maximum or 11-hour rest-period checks, a retention period, tamper-evident change history, or an export built for an inspection — thin for the German recording duty. 3 7 8
The Field Supervisor
Working time is recorded to the minute with configurable break rules and individual working-time models per employee, an automatic overtime account with capping, and the Clock line is sold with gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen. But we found no public information on warnings for the daily 8/10-hour maximum or the 11-hour rest period, and no stated retention period — for an inspection those are the first questions. 3 7 8
The Skeptic
The homepage says times are tracked 'rechtssicher' and ZEP Clock lists 'Gesetzeskonforme Einstellungen', while the help pages actually specify configurable break rules, individual working-time models and per-employee reports. I found no public information on daily maximum-hour warnings, rest-period checks, a stated retention period, or a tamper-evident change history — and 'gesetzeskonform' without the named rule behind it is a label, not a feature. 1 3 7 8
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
Absence is genuinely deep: approval by department managers and deputies with status workflow and email notification, sick leave with certificates, entitlement calculated and prorated automatically (their own worked example, 30 ÷ 12 × 5 = 12.5 days), month/week/day calendar views, and scheduling that shows overload warnings and cleans up planned entries on absence days in one go. But the planning evidence is project resource scheduling in hours, percentages and time slots rather than a duty roster; I found no public information on shift templates, swap or substitution workflows, qualification checks, or coverage warnings before a plan is published. 7 8 9 10
The Payroll Officer
Absence is properly run: categories including sickness, approval by administrators or department managers with email notification, sick-leave capture, pro-rata vacation entitlement with worked calculation examples, and a read-only month lock. The planning side is project resource scheduling in percentages, hours or time slots with overload warnings rather than a shift roster — I found no public information on shift templates with qualification or rest-period checks, swap workflows or holiday calendars per location, and carry-over into the new year is not documented. 7 8 9 10
The Works Council Advocate
Absence is handled seriously: request, approval and withdrawal with department deputies, sickness with certificates, automatic entitlement that is pro-rated with the arithmetic shown, remaining-leave balances, read-only closed months and calendars shared for deputy arrangements. Planning is capacity scheduling by percentage, hours or time slots with overload warnings and holiday and weekend markers, not a shift roster. We found no public information on per-location public-holiday calendars, qualification or rest-period checks on plans, or swap workflows. 6 8 9 10
The Agency Owner
Vacation entitlement is automatic and prorated with a documented worked example, sickness with certificates is recorded, department managers approve with email notification, weekends and public holidays are blocked, and the planning matrix shows overload warnings with cleanup of scheduling on absence days. I found no public information on shift templates, qualification checks, substitution or swap workflows, or carry-over handling, so the rostering half of planning is not shown for this consultancy-focused product. 8 9 10
The Field Supervisor
Absence is genuinely handled: full, half and hourly requests with approval statuses and role-based approvers, sick notes with certificates, month-end locking, weekend and holiday blocking, and vacation entitlement prorated by employment period with remaining vacation on the dashboard. Planning is capacity scheduling — percentages of regular working time made day-precise with overload warnings — rather than duty rosters; we found no public information on shift templates with rest-period checks or swap workflows. 6 8 9 10
The Skeptic
Vacation is genuinely handled: pro-rata entitlement with a worked calculation example, employment periods with their own quotas, sickness and other absence categories, an approval workflow with statuses and notifications, and shareable calendars. The planning side is percentage-based resource scheduling with overload warnings and cleanup of scheduling on absence days — I found no public information on shift templates, qualification or rest-period checks, per-location holiday calendars, or swap workflows, so this reads as capacity planning, not duty rostering. One blemish: after a contract change, entitlements are recalculated manually rather than automatically. 8 9 10
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
Recorded time carries a billable flag, notes and favourites, hourly and daily rates with price groups per project and employee, cost centres drawn from project or employee master data, and flows on to invoices: released items from multiple projects billed in a single automated run, XRechnung and ZUGFeRD 2.1 output, and a DATEV or Lexware export. I found no public information on budget-tracking warnings or how rates are handled when they change mid-project, so I stop short of the top. 5 10 11 12 14
The Payroll Officer
This is the product's centre of gravity: client, project and task master data, a billable switch on every booking, hourly and day rates plus project price groups, planned revenue from scheduled hours, and invoicing that runs from released items into XRechnung and ZUGFeRD with a maintained DATEV invoice synchronisation and cost centres from project or employee master data. I found no public information on rate rules surviving a change mid-project or client-facing report packs, which is what keeps it a step short of the full mark. 5 10 11 12 14
The Works Council Advocate
A booking carries a billable flag, note and work location; clients, projects, tasks and cost centres structure the time; hourly and daily rates come from price groups on the project-employee assignment; and released invoice items are billed automatically as XRechnung or ZUGFeRD 2.1 with a DATEV invoice synchronisation on top. The project view sets planned revenue against times booked. We found no public information on budget warnings at a set limit or on how rates behave when changed mid-project. 3 5 10 11 12
The Agency Owner
This is the closest to my shop's engine I have judged: billable flag per booking, hourly and daily rates via price groups on the project-employee assignment, cost centres from project or employee, invoice items released before automated billing, and DATEV, Lexware, XRechnung and ZUGFeRD 2.1 handoffs. The project view tracks plan, open and actual figures, but I found no public information on budget overrun warnings, rate rules surviving a mid-project change, or client-facing reports. 3 5 10 11 12 14
The Field Supervisor
This is the vendor's home ground: customer, project and task master data, cost centres from project or employee, price groups with hourly and daily rates, a billable flag on every booking, release before billing, and automated invoicing with XRechnung and ZUGFeRD feeding DATEV or Lexware. We found no public information on budget tracking with overrun warnings. 5 10 11 12
The Skeptic
This is the vendor's home ground: projects and tasks carry a billable flag, price groups hold rates per project and employee assignment, planned revenue is computed from scheduled hours, and released invoice items are billed automatically into XRechnung and ZUGFeRD documents with maintained DATEV and Lexware exports. Cost centres come from project or employee master data, documented for the expense handoff. I found no public information on budget warnings beyond planned-versus-actual totals, role-based rate cards, or client-facing reports, which keeps the record short of the top. 5 10 11 12 14
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 named payroll path exists in headline form — synchronisation of 'Lohn & Gehalt' and LODAS with DATEV, and transfer of ZEP time bookings to Personio — which is more than a generic CSV claim. But the documented export formats I can actually read are about travel expense reports going to accounting, write-protected after export and feeding DATEV finalisation, and I found no public information on how hours, overtime, or night, Sunday and holiday surcharges reach payroll in a defined wage-type format. 1 7 13 14
The Payroll Officer
Named payroll links exist — DATEV Lohn und Gehalt, LODAS, and a transfer of time bookings to Personio — and surcharges for public holidays and special times can be reported as time supplements into the overtime account, with months locked read-only. But the captured pages document the expense-to-accounting export in DATEV detail and stay silent on what the payroll export actually carries: no wage-type mapping for night, Sunday or holiday supplements, nothing on mid-month changes, and nothing on retro corrections after the close, which is where my month either reconciles or doesn't. 1 8 9 13
The Works Council Advocate
DATEV Lohn & Gehalt and LODAS are named for payroll synchronisation and ZEP time bookings are transferred to Personio, so a named payroll path exists. The documented exports — DATEV, Lexware and a general CSV — are described for expense accounting from an internal-cost perspective, and we found no public information on what the payroll handoff carries for night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, time accounts or mid-month changes, nor on a lock step before transmission; supplements for public holidays and special times exist in the system, but the pages do not show them reaching payroll. 1 7 13 14
The Agency Owner
DATEV Lohn & Gehalt and LODAS are named for payroll synchronisation, time bookings transfer to Personio, closed months are read-only, and DATEV finalisation is irreversible once exported. The detailed export documentation is scoped to travel-cost accounting from an internal-cost perspective, and I found no public information on night, Sunday or holiday surcharge export, mid-month changes, or retro corrections after the close. 1 7 9 13 14
The Field Supervisor
A DATEV synchronisation covering Lohn & Gehalt and LODAS is named, and documented DATEV, Lexware and general CSV exports exist — but the export we can read documented carries internal travel expenses rather than hours and overtime, and the accounting export module sits only in the top tier. We found no public information on how night, Sunday and holiday surcharges reach payroll, or on a lock step before transmission. 1 13 14
The Skeptic
The interfaces page names DATEV Lohn & Gehalt and LODAS, Personio receives ZEP time bookings, and the absence module promises workflows through to payroll — payroll is named, in other words. But the documented export covers travel expenses from an internal-cost perspective into financial accounting, not wage types, and I found no public information on how night, Sunday or holiday surcharges, time accounts or mid-month changes reach the payroll format. A named payroll interface with an undocumented payload is exactly the promise a buyer must test in a trial, not on a page. 1 7 8 13 14
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
Hosting and development in Germany, daily backups in several German data centres, and ISO 27001 certification covering ZEP and its cloud hosting partners are all stated plainly — that is the baseline I want for my workforce data. The chain is what is missing: the data-centre provider is not named, I found no published subprocessor list, and the contracting entity appears only as ZEP GmbH in a copyright line. 1 4 7
The Payroll Officer
German hosting and development are stated plainly, with daily backups in several German data centres and ISO 27001 certification covering the product and its cloud hosting partners. But the copyright names ZEP GmbH while the vendor line names provantis IT Solutions GmbH, and I found no public information on the contracting entity's jurisdiction or on any subprocessor — the hosting partners are mentioned but never named. 1 2 4
The Works Council Advocate
Hosting and development in Germany, daily encrypted backups across several German data centres, ISO 27001 certification extending to the cloud hosting partners and GDPR conformity are stated on the vendor's own pages, and the contracting entity appears as a GmbH. But the hosting partners are not named anywhere I can see, and we found no public information on a published subprocessor list. Before I co-sign data flows, I need that chain in writing. 1 4 7
The Agency Owner
The vendor's own pages state hosting and development in Germany with daily backups in multiple German data centres and ISO 27001 certification covering the cloud hosting partners. I found no public information naming those hosting partners or publishing a subprocessor list, and the independently sourced sovereignty data leaves contracting entity and data residency unconfirmed — vendor-stated German, not evidenced sovereign. 1 4 7
The Field Supervisor
Hosting and development are stated as Germany, with daily backups across several German data centres, ISO 27001 certification covering ZEP and its cloud hosting partners, and the site copyright names ZEP GmbH. We found no public information on a published subprocessor list or a named data-centre provider, so the chain behind those German servers cannot be checked before signing. 1 2 4
The Skeptic
The vendor states hosting and development in Germany, daily backups in multiple German data centres, and ISO 27001 covering ZEP and its cloud hosting partners. Who those partners are is the open question: I found no public information on a named data-centre provider, a published subprocessor list, or the contracting entity's jurisdiction beyond a German copyright footer naming ZEP GmbH. Germany by self-attestation is real but unverified, which sits mid-table for me. 1 2 4 12
Pricing transparency
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
Per-user headline prices are public and monthly billing is stated — ZEP Clock 'Ab 2€ pro User', ZEP Compact 'Ab 7€ pro User', ZEP Professional 'Ab 18€ pro User' — alongside a free 14-day trial, no onboarding costs and monthly contract adjustments. But I found no public pricing for the add-on modules or terminals, including the absence module my roster depends on, and for teams above twenty-five or fifty users the pages move to an individual offer, so I cannot compute the annual invoice for 200 people from public pages alone. 1 2 3
The Payroll Officer
Per-user prices are public for all three tiers — "Ab 2€ pro User", "Ab 7€ pro User", "Ab 18€ pro User" — with monthly billing, free onboarding and a price calculator advertised. But the three-to-eight add-on modules and the terminals carry no prices on the captured pages, VAT treatment is not stated, and above 25, 50 or 100 users depending on tier the price becomes an individual offer, so the real annual invoice is not computable from public pages alone. 2 3
The Works Council Advocate
Starting per-user prices for all three tiers are public with monthly billing stated, onboarding and migration carry no one-off cost, a fourteen-day trial is free and a price calculator is offered. But the add-on modules and terminals are presented as selectable without prices, teams above twenty-five, fifty or one hundred users are directed to individual offers, and we found no public information on VAT treatment or a minimum term. So the real annual invoice cannot be computed from the public pages. 2 3
The Agency Owner
All three tiers carry public per-user prices with monthly billing — 'Ab 2€ pro User', 'Ab 7€ pro User', 'Ab 18€ pro User' — plus a public price calculator, no onboarding costs, and published discount terms. I found no public prices for the add-on modules or the terminals and no statement of VAT treatment or minimum term, and from 25 to 100 users upward the pricing moves to an individual offer, so I cannot compute my annual invoice for forty people from the public pages alone. 1 2 3
The Field Supervisor
Per-user prices are public for all three tiers — ZEP Clock Ab 2€ pro User, ZEP Compact Ab 7€, ZEP Professional Ab 18€, monthly billing, no onboarding costs, free premium support — and a price calculator is offered. But the add-on modules and the terminals the plans point to carry no public prices, and above 25, 50 or 100 users depending on tier the price becomes an individual offer, so a larger buyer cannot compute the annual invoice alone. 2 3
The Skeptic
All three tiers carry public per-user prices — 'Ab 2€ pro User', 'Ab 7€ pro User', 'Ab 18€ pro User' — with monthly billing and monthly contract adjustments stated. The captured pages name the add-on modules and the hardware terminal that the capture story depends on as purchasable but show no price for either, and teams above 25, 50 or 100 users move to individual offers. A price calculator is mentioned; I found no public information on whether it includes terminal hardware, setup, VAT treatment or renewal terms. 1 2 3
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 | — | 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 |
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 — 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.
- 43 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
- 17 pricing 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 compliance 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 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
- 3 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 support 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 hosting 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
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (14)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing www.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
- 3 Features www.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
- 4 Security / trust page www.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap www.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap www.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap support.zep.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →