Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Manages your SLAs within Jira. Simply define SLAs to see a countdown to target date according to SLA. Configure notifiers to get notified if the issue is close to critical time or just after the breach.
| Time to SLA | Time in Status | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Jira productivity reports: time in status, cycle time, lead time and transitions between statuses, sprint performance report
| Metric | Time to SLA | Time in Status |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.8 ★ | 4.5 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 230 | 208 |
| Active installs | 3,483+ | 5,571+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
| Pricing | From $0/yr | From $0/yr |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
| Pricing tiers | 6 tiers | 6 tiers |
| Listed features | 3 | 3 |
| Featured placements | 1 | 1 |
Time to SLA edges out Time in Status on rating (4.8★ vs 4.5★), but the gap is small enough that pricing fit and feature differentiation should drive the decision more than the headline number. Pricing entry tiers: Time to SLA at From $0/yr, Time in Status at From $0/yr. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (apps, orders, integrations) varies. Recommended by store size: small/early-stage merchants who need fast install and low risk should default to Time to SLA; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Time in Status's 208-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Time to SLA's broader-but-shallower coverage. This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Atlassian Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Time to SLA audit • Time in Status audit
| Keyword | Time to SLA | Time in Status |
|---|---|---|
| time | #3 | #1 |
Both Time to SLA and Time in Status offer paid plans only. Time to SLA starts at From $0/yr; Time in Status starts at From $0/yr. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Time to SLA has the higher average rating (4.8★ from 230 reviews) compared to Time in Status (4.5★ from 208 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. Time to SLA fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Time in Status is the call if you need the larger user base. Read both apps' detail pages on AppRanks for the full feature breakdown, install counts, and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Atlassian Marketplace marketplace. Time to SLA has more onboarding documentation maturity (230 reviews vs 208), which usually translates to better-tested setup wizards and quicker time-to-value. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly — read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for merchant-reported install experience.
Time to SLA typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (230 reviews). Time in Status aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (208 reviews). Larger review bases generally mean the app has been load-tested at scale — relevant if you're processing high order volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Time to SLA and Time in Status both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Time in Status" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.