BetterFlow vs Hubstaff: proving work without screenshots
Hubstaff takes employee monitoring seriously: screenshots, mouse movement tracking, app usage monitoring, GPS location tracking. For employers worried about remote work productivity, this surveillance approach provides visibility. But it comes with costs: destroyed trust, privacy concerns, and metrics that measure activity instead of output.
BetterFlow takes the opposite approach. Instead of monitoring what employees do, it verifies what they deliver. For engineering teams, commits and completed tickets prove work more reliably than screenshots ever could.
Top QA Companies: Output vs Activity Monitoring
The best software testing companies and top QA providers focus on deliverables, not surveillance. At BetterQA, we built BetterFlow because we needed to prove work to clients without treating our team like suspects.
Quick comparison
FeatureBetterFlowHubstaff Time trackingYesYes Screenshot monitoringNoYes Mouse/keyboard trackingNoYes App usage monitoringNoYes GPS trackingNoYes GitHub verificationYesNo Jira verificationYesBasic integration AI-powered insightsYesBasic analytics Leave managementYesYes Starting price$8/user/month$7/user/month
The surveillance problem
Screenshot monitoring captures activity, not productivity. A developer staring at code while thinking through a complex problem appears idle. A developer frantically clicking through browser tabs appears busy. Neither appearance reflects actual output.
Worse, surveillance destroys the trust that makes remote work functional. Employees who feel monitored optimize for appearing busy rather than being productive. The metrics improve while actual output suffers.
When to choose Hubstaff
Hubstaff makes sense when you need activity monitoring for roles where output can't be measured objectively. You have legitimate concerns about time theft that justify surveillance trade-offs. Your industry requires detailed activity logging for compliance. GPS tracking for field workers is a core requirement. You've accepted the cultural cost of employee monitoring.
Some businesses genuinely need surveillance-level monitoring. Hubstaff serves that market competently.
When to choose BetterFlow
BetterFlow makes sense when you manage engineering teams whose output can be measured through commits and tickets. You want verification without surveillance and the trust destruction it causes. You believe employees work better when trusted than when watched. AI-powered insights into productivity patterns would help capacity planning. You need combined timesheet and leave management.
For engineering teams, output-based verification provides accountability without the toxic side effects of surveillance.
Output vs activity
Hubstaff measures: screenshots taken, mouse movements detected, apps used, keyboard strokes counted.
BetterFlow measures: commits pushed, pull requests merged, tickets completed, hours correlated with deliverables.
For engineering work, the second set of metrics actually indicates productivity. The first set indicates presence at a computer, which isn't the same thing.
Trust and culture
Surveillance sends a message: "We don't trust you to work without being watched." That message shapes culture in predictable ways.
Teams under surveillance often game the metrics, focusing on appearing busy rather than doing good work. They resent the monitoring and disengage from the organization. Top performers leave for employers who treat them like professionals, not suspects.
BetterFlow's verification sends a different message: "We trust you to work, and we verify output to keep everyone accountable." That framing preserves trust while maintaining accountability.
Privacy considerations
Screenshot monitoring captures whatever is on screen: personal messages, medical information, financial data. Even with "privacy zones" to blur sensitive areas, the surveillance captures more than just work activity.
BetterFlow's verification uses only work-related data: commit messages, ticket IDs, timestamps. No personal information is captured because the system doesn't monitor screens or keystrokes.
The verdict
Hubstaff is the better choice when you genuinely need surveillance-level monitoring and have accepted the cultural trade-offs. Some businesses require this level of visibility for compliance or trust reasons.
BetterFlow is the better choice when you want accountability without surveillance. For engineering teams, deliverable-based verification proves work more effectively than screenshots while preserving the trust that makes good work possible.
The question isn't which tool monitors better. It's whether monitoring is the right approach at all. For engineering teams, output verification typically works better than activity surveillance.
About BetterFlow
Built by BetterQA, a software testing company that builds its own tools. BetterFlow proves work through deliverables, providing accountability without the trust-destroying effects of surveillance monitoring.
Sources & References
- Hubstaff - Employee Monitoring Features
- Harvard Business Review - The Risks of Employee Monitoring
- Gartner - Employee Monitoring Trends
Published by BetterQA, an ISO 27001 and ISO 9001 certified company with 8+ years of experience in software quality assurance. According to research by McKinsey, data-driven project management improves team productivity by up to 25%. Last updated on .
- Built by BetterQA, founded in 2018 in Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- ISO 27001 certified security and GDPR compliant
- Trusted by teams across 15+ countries
- 30-day free trial with no credit card required
