head to head · open source

Polar vs TimeTracker

Polar has 10,293 GitHub stars, 795 forks, 141 open issues and last shipped today. TimeTracker has 628 stars, 68 forks, 3 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Polar leads on adoption by 1,539% (10,293 vs 628 stars). Polar is written in Python under Apache-2.0; TimeTracker is written in Python under GPL-3.0. Polar has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, TimeTracker 11%. Polar was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

Polar ★ 10K TimeTracker ★ 628 category Business Software

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

Polar TimeTracker
GitHub stars ★ 10K ★ 628
License Apache-2.0 GPL-3.0
Written in Python Python
Last push 2026-09-28 2026-09-27
Forks ⑂ 795 ⑂ 68
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Polar if

  • You weight community size — 10K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Polar profile →

pick TimeTracker if

  • You want the TimeTracker feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the GPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and TimeTracker fits your workflow better

full TimeTracker profile →

About Polar

Polar is an open source billing platform and payment infrastructure project for digital products, SaaS applications, and AI workloads. It is written in Python, licensed under Apache 2.0, and built around FastAPI, Next.js, React, and Turborepo. The project positions itself as a financial layer for software that needs to charge for tokens, agents, compute, subscriptions, and usage based models.

read the full Polar overview →

About TimeTracker

TimeTracker is a self hosted, web based time tracking and invoicing application, released under the GPL 3.0 and built on Python and Flask, for freelancers, small teams, agencies and privacy focused organisations that want Toggl or Clockify style timers, project management and client billing while keeping their data on their own infrastructure.

read the full TimeTracker overview →

More in Business Software

Plane ★ 60K Twenty ★ 58K Odoo ★ 55K Cal.com ★ 49K Rocket.Chat ★ 46K cobalt ★ 44K

Related comparisons

erpnext vs polar erpnext vs midday erpnext vs aureuserp erpnext vs frappe erpnext vs lago erpnext vs akaunting erpnext vs invoice-ninja erpnext vs idurar-erp-crm opencode vs vibe-kanban conductor vs vibe-kanban vibe-kanban vs wekan vibe-kanban vs qinglong vibe-kanban vs edict vibe-kanban vs openproject vibe-kanban vs onedev wekan vs qinglong plane vs rocket-chat plane vs cobalt plane vs buzz rocket-chat vs cobalt plane vs jitsi plane vs srs plane vs huly plane vs zulip

More Finance & Accounting projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Finance & Accounting field.

Polar vs ERPNext Polar vs Midday Polar vs aureuserp Polar vs Lago Polar vs Akaunting Polar vs Invoice Ninja Polar vs idurar-erp-crm Polar vs TaxHacker Polar vs Expensify Polar vs Frappe Books Polar vs hledger Polar vs personal-management-system

Frequently asked questions

Is Polar or TimeTracker more popular?

Polar has 10,293 GitHub stars and TimeTracker has 628. Polar has the larger community by that measure.

Are Polar and TimeTracker free?

Both are open source. Polar is licensed under Apache-2.0 and TimeTracker under GPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Polar and TimeTracker?

Polar is written in Python and TimeTracker in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Polar or TimeTracker?

Choose Polar if you want the larger community (10,293 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose TimeTracker if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.