TimeTracker vs Ziit
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
Ziit
The Swiss army knife of code time tracking (alternative to WakaTime)
| Feature | TimeTracker | Ziit |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Time Tracking | Time Tracking |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, source | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 615 | ★ 249 |
| First released | 2024 | 2025 |
| Replaces | 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 Ziit if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in TypeScript
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is TimeTracker or Ziit better?
Neither is universally better. TimeTracker has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are TimeTracker and Ziit free and open-source?
Yes. TimeTracker is licensed under MIT and Ziit under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run TimeTracker and Ziit with Docker?
TimeTracker: yes. Ziit: yes.