arbtt vs Timewarrior
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted time tracking options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
arbtt
Automatic rule-based time tracker for desktops
VS
Timewarrior
Command-line time tracking with powerful reporting
| Feature | arbtt | Timewarrior |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Time Tracking | Time Tracking |
| License | GPL-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Haskell | C++ |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | binary, source | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 354 | ★ 1,637 |
| First released | 2009 | 2016 |
| Replaces | RescueTime, ManicTime | Toggl |
Why pick each one
Choose arbtt if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Written in Haskell
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Choose Timewarrior if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (1.6k GitHub stars)
- Written in C++
Frequently asked questions
Is arbtt or Timewarrior better?
Timewarrior is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider arbtt if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are arbtt and Timewarrior free and open-source?
Yes. arbtt is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Timewarrior under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run arbtt and Timewarrior with Docker?
arbtt: check the project docs for container support. Timewarrior: check the project docs for container support.