- Time tracking: Track time on web, desktop, mobile and browser extensions.
- Calendar view: Plan and inspect tracked work in a calendar-style view.
- Reports: Review billable time and project reports.
- Team controls: Paid plans add permissions, labor insights and planning.
- Integrations: Connect tracking workflows to supported work tools.
Toggl Track
Flexible time tracking software with powerful reporting for teams and businesses
Updated August 11, 2026
Toggl Track Overview
Toggl Track is a time tracker with calendar and planning views rather than a traditional scheduling app. It records work through web, desktop, mobile and browser tools, so people can use the method that fits their day.
Calendar views help users place tracked work in context, while reports break down time by project, client or team. Billable-time data can then support invoicing and project reviews.
Key Features
Pricing
| Plan | Price | Featured |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | Core time tracking for limited users and projects |
| Starter | $9/license/month | Time tracking, billable rates and reporting |
| Premium | $14/license/month for the first year, then $18/license/month | Advanced team controls, labor insights and planning |
Starter and Premium are priced per license. Premium's published first-year amount is promotional, so the following renewal rate also belongs in a long-term budget.
Pricing source: Toggl Track pricing
Pros
| Compared with | Why this product may fit better |
|---|---|
| Clockify | Set against Clockify, Toggl Track has a polished, low-friction timer across browser, desktop and mobile apps, backed by mature reporting. Teams that struggle to get people to record time may value quick adoption more than the largest possible free allowance. |
| Harvest | Harvest is the other option here. The calendar view, automated tracking options and flexible reports support individual time awareness as well as client billing. Toggl Track can suit teams that want to understand work patterns before turning every entry into an invoice process. |
| Everhour | Against Everhour, Toggl Track can stand on its own rather than living primarily inside a project-management platform. That independence helps companies using several work systems or people who need one timer across client, internal and personal projects. |
| TimeCamp | TimeCamp takes a different route. A clean interface and broad app coverage make Toggl Track easier to introduce when accurate manual time entry is the first priority. It can avoid the heavier monitoring feel that some teams associate with more automated workforce tracking products. |
Cons
| Compared with | Where this product may fall short |
|---|---|
| Clockify | Clockify’s generous free model can be hard to beat for large teams with basic time-tracking needs. Toggl Track’s free tier caps users and its paid price requires a clear productivity or reporting benefit to justify the switch. |
| Harvest | Before making the switch, Harvest connects time and expenses closely to invoicing, which is often the shortest path for agencies and consultants. Toggl Track may require another billing tool when the buyer wants recorded hours to become client invoices with minimal handoff. |
| Everhour | Everhour’s deep presence inside supported project tools can reduce context switching for teams that already manage all work there. A standalone Toggl process is less attractive when people resist opening another timer or correcting entries in another system. |
| TimeCamp | On this point, TimeCamp offers more emphasis on automatic capture, attendance and workforce oversight. Toggl Track’s lighter experience may leave gaps for organizations that need policy enforcement or detailed employee monitoring rather than voluntary, individual time entry. |
Reviews
- Toggl Track reviews on G2: The profile is rated 4.6/5 from 1,589 reviews, giving it a much broader sample than most pages in this batch. Recent entries help distinguish praise for quick time entry from complaints about reporting, billing or team administration.
- Reddit review: The original poster praised the "beautiful UI" but also raised concerns about synchronization, bugs and pricing. The post was reconstructed through the Reddit evidence path, and its mixed account is more useful than lifting the positive phrase alone.
