Learn how Hackatime and SolidTime differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these time tracking tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Both Hackatime and SolidTime have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
SolidTime significantly outpaces Hackatime in community adoption with 8,861 stars compared to 183 stars on GitHub. This 48.4x difference suggests SolidTime has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, SolidTime has 499 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Hackatime is growing faster, adding 25 stars in the last 30 days (+16%) against adding 63 stars for SolidTime (+0.7%). Hackatime is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Hackatime last updated 7 hours ago and SolidTime 2 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Hackatime uses Ruby while SolidTime leverages Vue, PHP, Laravel.
SolidTime has been in development longer, starting 3 years ago, compared to Hackatime which began 2 years ago. This 1.1-year head start suggests SolidTime may have more mature features and established processes.
Hackatime uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than SolidTime's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Time Tracking.
Both Hackatime and SolidTime offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.