Clockify costs less than TimeSubmit at every team size, and it is a good product. If price is the deciding factor, stop reading and use Clockify. This page exists because for some consultancies it is not the deciding factor, and it is worth being precise about which ones.
What each costs, like for like
Comparing free Clockify against paid TimeSubmit is not a fair comparison, because Clockify's free plan does not include the two things a consultancy needs most. Timesheet approvals and invoicing both first appear on Clockify's Standard plan at $5.49 per seat per month billed annually (clockify.me/pricing, checked 31 August 2026). The free plan covers up to five users and does not include either.
So the honest comparison is Clockify Standard against TimeSubmit:
| Team size | Clockify Standard | TimeSubmit Practice | TimeSubmit Core |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 people | $27.45 | $39 | $70 |
| 10 people | $54.90 | not available | $140 |
| 25 people | $137.25 | not available | $350 |
| 50 people | $274.50 | not available | $700 |
Clockify is cheaper at every row, and the gap widens as you grow. TimeSubmit Practice is $39 a month for up to five members after a 60-day trial and is capped there. Core is $42 covering three members then $14 for each additional, or $33 a month billed annually. Figures verified against both pricing pages on 31 August 2026.
The one difference that decides it
TimeSubmit has a dedicated approver role. An approver has their own account, reviews and acts on timesheets, and never sees billing rates or invoice totals.
That matters when the person approving the hours is not someone you want seeing your margins. In a consultancy that is often a client-side manager, a project sponsor, or a partner at the firm you are subcontracting for. They need to confirm the hours are real. They do not need to know what you charge for them, and in some engagements they should not.
Clockify's approvals are performed by admins and managers, who by design have visibility of the workspace including rates. There is no role in Clockify that can approve time while being blind to money. If your approvers are internal and rate visibility is not sensitive, this distinction costs you nothing and Clockify is the better-value choice.
The second difference: what happens after approval
In TimeSubmit an approved timesheet becomes an invoice directly. One approved timesheet, or several combined, generate a PDF carrying your logo, payment terms, tax details and bank details, across seven currencies. There is no re-entry step between the hours being signed off and the invoice going out.
Clockify Standard includes invoicing too, and for many teams it is sufficient. The difference is one of sequence rather than capability: TimeSubmit is built so that nothing can be invoiced until it has been approved, because that is the workflow it exists to enforce.
Where Clockify is genuinely better
- Price, at every team size, as the table above shows.
- A running timer. Clockify's timer, idle detection, Pomodoro mode and auto-tracker are mature and well liked. TimeSubmit has no timer at all; it uses structured weekly or monthly timesheets.
- Free for very small teams. Up to five users, if you do not need approvals or invoicing.
- Breadth. Kiosk mode, scheduling, expenses on Pro, a large integration catalogue, mature mobile and desktop apps. Clockify has been building for years across a wider surface.
- Expenses. Clockify has expense tracking from Pro. TimeSubmit does not have it at all.
Where TimeSubmit is the better fit
Narrower, and deliberately so:
- The approver must not see rates.
- You will not raise an invoice until the hours behind it are formally approved.
- You want approvals and invoicing in the same place as the timesheets, rather than assembled from parts.
- You bill in several currencies and want that handled in the invoice itself.
If two or more of those describe your firm, the price difference is buying a workflow rather than a feature list. If none do, it is not.
What TimeSubmit does not do
No running timer. No accounting integration: invoices come out as PDFs and go into your accounting package separately. No expense tracking. No mobile app. These are real gaps and worth weighing before switching anything.
Frequently asked questions
Is Clockify's free plan really free for consultancies?
Yes, for up to five users, but it excludes timesheet approvals and invoicing. A consultancy that needs a sign-off step before billing will need Standard at $5.49 per seat per month billed annually, which is where the fair comparison begins.
Can a Clockify approver be prevented from seeing billing rates?
Not as a role. Approvals in Clockify are carried out by admins and managers, who have workspace visibility including rates. TimeSubmit's approver role exists specifically to separate the two.
Which is better for a five-person consultancy?
On price, Clockify Standard at $27.45 against TimeSubmit Practice at $39. The $11.55 difference buys the approver role and the approved-hours-to-invoice sequence. Whether that is worth it depends entirely on whether your approvers should see rates.
Does TimeSubmit have a free plan?
No. Practice starts with a 60-day trial and a card is required to begin it.
Can I move from Clockify to TimeSubmit?
Timesheet data exports from Clockify as CSV. There is no automated importer, so expect to set up projects, clients and approvers by hand. For a firm under twenty-five people that is usually an afternoon.
Trying it
If you are comparing on price, Clockify wins and this page has said so plainly. If you are comparing on whether the person approving your timesheets should be able to see what you charge, that is the question worth answering first.
See approval workflows for how the approver role works, pricing in full, or the comparison for firms leaving Harvest after the 2026 price rise.