The team will actually fill timesheets, you do not need screenshots, and price is the constraint.
If you only need a timesheet, Clockify usually wins on price. If you live in retainers and invoices, Harvest is smoother. If clients ask “prove those hours,” neither is enough — that is where Hourivo sits.
Honest split: two timesheet tools, one proof-of-work + billing stack.
| Area | Clockify | Harvest | Hourivo |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | Generous free plan | Paid per seat | $2 then $1/user at 20+ |
| Timesheets | Excellent | Excellent | Desktop timer + approvals |
| Invoices | Limited / add-ons | Core strength | From approved hours |
| Screenshot proof | No | No | Timer-only + privacy blur |
| Project margins | Basic reports | Budget vs spent | Live cost vs billable |
| Best when | You just need hours logged | You bill from Harvest already | Clients dispute remote hours |
The team will actually fill timesheets, you do not need screenshots, and price is the constraint.
Invoicing, retainers, and expense workflows are already your operating system.
You manage remote or outsourced people and clients ask for proof — without Time Doctor-style spyware.
Some teams track + prove in Hourivo, then invoice in Harvest. Start with the 30-day trial and see if one stack is enough.
Clockify if you want cheap timesheets. Harvest if invoices are the product. Hourivo if you also need proof of remote work. Deeper pages: vs Clockify and vs Harvest.
No. Both are honor-system timesheets. Hourivo captures optional screenshots only while the timer runs.
Clockify’s free plan is cheaper. Hourivo is $1–$2/user because it includes proof, margins, and invoices — not only a timer.
Start free for 30 days. Timer hours, privacy-blur screenshots, margins, then invoice.
Start free trial →