TimeTracker vs TimeTagger
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?
TimeTracker
Self-hosted web-based time tracking for teams
VS
TimeTagger
Tag-based time tracker with an interactive timeline
| Feature | TimeTracker | TimeTagger |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Time Tracking | Time Tracking |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, source | docker, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 615 | ★ 1,769 |
| First released | 2024 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Toggl, Harvest | Toggl, Harvest |
Why pick each one
Choose TimeTracker if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Choose TimeTagger if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.8k GitHub stars)
Frequently asked questions
Is TimeTracker or TimeTagger better?
TimeTagger is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider TimeTracker if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are TimeTracker and TimeTagger free and open-source?
Yes. TimeTracker is licensed under MIT and TimeTagger under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run TimeTracker and TimeTagger with Docker?
TimeTracker: yes. TimeTagger: yes.