# Time and attendance: what fourteen AI models recommend, and why, November 2026

Gane Index, November 2026 Edition. Page: https://www.gane.ai/index/hr/core/time-and-attendance/guide

Fourteen AI models were asked for time and attendance system six ways each, on behalf of a small, a mid-market and an enterprise B2B company: 252 answers, in which a judge labeled 99 products. Twelve of them carry at least 10 labels and a first choice, and are ranked. This guide walks the top eight in the order the mid-market standing puts them, with what the models said for and against each, in their words. Rippling leads at 15% of first choices, and the standing is contested.

## At a glance

| # | Product | Share | Negative rate | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rippling | 15% | 0% | 27 |
| 2 | Clockify | 12% | 11% | 28 |
| 3 | Homebase | 12% | 9% | 23 |
| 4 | Toggl Track | 12% | 10% | 10 |
| 5 | Deputy | 10% | 3% | 35 |
| 6 | Jibble | 10% | 0% | 19 |
| 7 | TimeCamp | 4% | 0% | 14 |
| 8 | Connecteam | 2% | 0% | 40 |

## 1. Rippling

Rippling is #1 of 12 at 15% of first choices, 27 labels, negative rate 0%. By buyer: small business #9 of 12 at 4%; mid-market #1 of 12 at 15%; enterprise #3 of 10 at 8%.


## 2. Clockify

Clockify is #2 of 12 at 12% of first choices, 28 labels, negative rate 11%. By buyer: small business #2 of 12 at 15%; mid-market #2 of 12 at 12%; enterprise unranked.

- For: "Clockify's unlimited free plan makes it the go-to time and attendance solution for bootstrapped teams" (Claude Haiku 4.5, budget prompt)
- For: "Homebase (free tier) or Clockify (free up to 5 users) are excellent starting points" (DeepSeek V4 Flash, budget prompt)
- Against: "Avoid basic time trackers like Clockify unless your needs are simple" (MiniMax M2.5, direct prompt)
- Against: "I wouldn't choose Clockify just because its free plan is generous: its attendance and overtime reporting are on a paid tier" (GPT-6 Luna, budget prompt)

## 3. Homebase

Homebase is #3 of 12 at 12% of first choices, 23 labels, negative rate 9%. By buyer: small business #1 of 12 at 22%; mid-market #3 of 12 at 12%; enterprise unranked.

- For: "For the tightest budgets, Homebase (free tier) or Clockify (free up to 5 users) are excellent starting points." (DeepSeek V4 Flash, budget prompt)
- Against: "I'm not citing this one because the best current comparison would depend on the specific package you're evaluating" (GPT-5.4 mini, comparative prompt)
- Against: "Homebase also has a free option, but it is limited to one location and up to 10 employees." (Claude Haiku 4.5, budget prompt)

## 4. Toggl Track

Toggl Track is #4 of 12 at 12% of first choices, 10 labels, negative rate 10%. By buyer: small business #4 of 12 at 11%; mid-market #4 of 12 at 12%; enterprise unranked.

- For: "Toggl is widely considered the industry leader for mid-sized consultancies, dev shops, and agencies." (Qwen 3.7 Flash, paraphrase prompt)
- For: "I'd suggest starting with ClickTime or Toggl Track as your primary options" (Kimi K2, paraphrase prompt)
- Against: "Clockify / Toggl (more basic, free tier available)" (MiniMax M2.5, scale prompt)

## 5. Deputy

Deputy is #5 of 12 at 10% of first choices, 35 labels, negative rate 3%. By buyer: small business #8 of 12 at 4%; mid-market #5 of 12 at 10%; enterprise #4 of 10 at 6%.

- For: "Deputy offers the strongest overall combination of time tracking, attendance management, scheduling, and workforce controls" (Claude Haiku 4.5, comparative prompt)
- For: "Recommendation: Start with a trial of Deputy. It offers the broadest feature set for a mid-sized team" (Qwen 3.7 Flash, direct prompt)

## 6. Jibble

Jibble is #6 of 12 at 10% of first choices, 19 labels, negative rate 0%. By buyer: small business #10 of 12 at 4%; mid-market #6 of 12 at 10%; enterprise unranked.

- For: "Jibble offers free time and attendance software for unlimited users, making it a strong option for small businesses" (Claude Haiku 4.5, budget prompt)
- For: "Jibble is the strongest overall choice: it offers a free plan with unlimited users" (Perplexity Sonar, budget prompt)

## 7. TimeCamp

TimeCamp is #7 of 12 at 4% of first choices, 14 labels, negative rate 0%. By buyer: small business #11 of 12 at 4%; mid-market #7 of 12 at 4%; enterprise unranked.

- For: "The best time and attendance system for a company with a limited budget is TimeCamp, which is extremely affordable" (Llama 4 Maverick, budget prompt)
- For: "For the lowest-cost paid option, TimeCamp's $3.99 per user plan is hard to beat." (Mistral Small, budget prompt)

## 8. Connecteam

Connecteam is #8 of 12 at 2% of first choices, 40 labels, negative rate 0%. By buyer: small business #12 of 12 at 2%; mid-market #8 of 12 at 2%; enterprise #10 of 10 at 2%.


## Questions the record answers

**Which time and attendance system do AI models name first most often?** Rippling, in 15% of first choices for a mid-market B2B company in the November 2026 Edition, from 27 labels. The standing is contested: the models did not settle on one product.

**Does the answer change with the size of the company?** Small business: Homebase at 22%. Mid-market: Rippling at 15%. Enterprise: UKG Pro Workforce Management at 29%. Each standing is computed within its segment and never pooled.

**Which framing changes the answer?** The direct, paraphrase, budget and scale framings count toward share. The product named first differs by framing: direct Rippling; paraphrase Toggl Track; comparative UKG Pro Workforce Management; budget-constrained Clockify; negative Rippling. The table above has the counts.

**How stable is one answer?** The repeat measurement is published with the next edition.

**Where do the answers come from?** Fourteen of the fourteen models return sources. Their 73 answers here cite 805 pages; the sites cited most are forbes.com, leadchangegroup.com, softwareadvice.com. The category page lists them all.

**Can a vendor pay to be on this list?** No. A product is on the record because a model named it. A vendor can claim its page, propose corrections to the vendor table and be told when its standing moves; it cannot change a label, a share or a rank, and the publisher's conflicts are disclosed on the method page.

Published under CC BY 4.0. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.