Small business▼−15Since September 2026: 25% → 10%, −15 points. Past the 13-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.
10%from 25% in September 2026
Cleared the floor by 2 pointsRank 1 → 4 of 58
1 category · RankedTimetastic
45Judge labels
6First choices
8Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
9% in Leave for small business buyers
Rank 6 of 95 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 7% of its 14 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Timetastic →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business4 of 65
9%24 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market6 of 95
4%14 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise97 of 98
0%7 labels
under the label threshold
In leave · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Timetastic for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leave and absence management | Core HR and payroll | 4% | 6 of 95 | 7% | 14 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 7% → 4%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Timetastic held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Leave · by segment
Mid-market▼−2Since September 2026: 7% → 4%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 7% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 6 of 91, unchanged
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 86 → 88 of 89
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leave | 7% | 4% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 7% → 4%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 6 of 95, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 13 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Timetastic across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Timetastic across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct5 labels1
Paraphrase1 label1
Comparative13 labels3not counted in share
Budget-constrained15 labels4
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative10 labels3not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative45 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 12 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Timetastic and the free plans from Connecteam or TalentHR are excellent starting points for budget-conscious companies.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Leave · budget prompt · first choice
“Go with lightweight, dedicated PTO trackers like Vacation Tracker, Calamari, or Timetastic” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Leave · negative prompt · first choice
“Timetastic (Top Pick for Value) ... no minimum monthly charge” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Leave · budget prompt · first choice
“Choose Timetastic if you want a simple, small-business-friendly product with clear low entry pricing.” Perplexity Sonar · Leave · budget prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“Timetastic may not be suitable for larger companies due to lack of advanced features, and the software only allows one manager or approver per department” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Leave · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Timetastic, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Timetastic was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Timetastic, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Timetastic was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Timetastic. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 45 of the 45 answers that named Timetastic and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
employsome.com26
forbes.com26
peoplemanagingpeople.com26
actiplans.com22
guideflow.com20
firsthr.app18
vacationtracker.io18
technologyadvice.com15
attendancebot.com14
apps365.com13
198 of the 198 domain citations in answers naming Timetastic came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
timetastic.co.uk is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Timetastic takes 4% of first choices and BambooHR takes 28%.ShowHide
Search and answers
timetastic.co.uk is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Timetastic takes 4% of first choices and BambooHR takes 28%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “leave management tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “leave management software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,000 a month (“timetastic”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 8 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 114,719 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 1,714 · 71 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,290
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
4%
rank 6 of 95 in leave
Segment leader
28%
BambooHR
- First choices
- 6 across its categories
- Named in
- 45 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 45 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on timetastic.co.uk
391
subdomains included
Content
339
counted in the table below
Documentation
4
Product · Integration
5 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 298 | 8 | 2026-09-23 | Time and attendance | |
| Case study | 25 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 10 | 0 | 2021-01-20 | ||
| Comparison | 2 | 0 | 2020-12-16 | ||
| Template or tool | 2 | 0 | 2021-01-13 | ||
| Podcast or video | 1 | 0 | 2020-08-26 | ||
| News or press | 1 | 0 | 2024-04-09 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23How to forget work when youre on holiday blog
- 2026-09-11Best rota software uk blog
- 2026-09-11Uk rota template blog
- 2026-09-04How to create a work rota blog
- 2026-08-25Clocking in app uk blog
- 2026-07-14How many hours are in a month blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page timetastic.co.uk exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow Timetastic
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Timetastic is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Timetastic is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Online Staff Leave & Holiday Planner for Modern Companies
- For
- teams and small companies
- Price stated
- Business: £1.20; Pro: £2.00 timetastic.co.uk
- Starting price
- 1.20 timetastic.co.uk
- Free plan or trial
- Free for one month—no card required. 30-day free trial. timetastic.co.uk
- Integrations claimed
- 2 timetastic.co.uk · 5 timetastic.co.uk/pricing pages disagree
- Certifications
- ISO/IEC 27001:2022 compliance
- Customers named
- SookioFormat
- Not stated on the pages read
- Hosting
What Timetastic's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: timetastic.co.uk, timetastic.co.uk/pricing, timetastic.co.uk/features/leave-types, timetastic.co.uk/customers. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Timetastic's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Timetastic, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Timetastic by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Timetastic is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Timetastic, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.