SoftwareGlimpse

7shifts vs Workable

Compare 7shifts and Workable on features, pricing, and buyer fit using the same researched criteria.

Independently recommendedLast updated Aug 18, 20264 evidence sourcesHow we compare
Compare another
7shifts logo

7shifts

8.2/10

Restaurant WFM priced per location — Essentials $44.99 (≤30 staff); Pro $89.99 (≤60); Premium $149.99 unlimited; free plan + 14-day Pro trial.

Best for

  • Restaurants and hospitality groups that want scheduling, punches, tips, and POS in one WFM
  • Operators comparing 7shifts as the hospitality default versus Homebase
  • Teams that will trial Pro for 14 days before Premium payroll

Starting from $44.99/user/mo

Free plan available

VS

Our verdict

Our verdict

No universal winner

No universal winner. Choose based on which criteria matter most for your team.

7shifts is better for

  • Starting pricing
  • Free plan
  • Integrations

Choose 7shifts if: Restaurants and hospitality groups that want scheduling, punches, tips, and POS in one WFM

Choose Workable if: SMB and lower mid-market teams that want a dedicated ATS with published prices

See detailed comparison ↓
Workable logo

Workable

7.2/10

Recruiting + light HR ATS with published floors — Standard $299/mo (1–20 employees, annual); Premier $599; Enterprise $719.

Best for

  • SMB and lower mid-market teams that want a dedicated ATS with published prices
  • Hiring teams that want a 15-day trial before a custom enterprise ATS quote
  • Companies that may use Workable’s light HR features without buying a full HRIS

Starting from $299.00/user/mo

No free plan

Evidence & transparency

Sources and research process behind this comparison.

Sources

4

Criteria

4

Screenshots

0

Sources consulted

TitleProductType
7shifts — Official Site7shiftsofficial-product-page
7shifts Pricing7shiftsofficial-pricing-page
Workable — Official SiteWorkableofficial-product-page
Workable PricingWorkableofficial-pricing-page

Methodology steps

  1. 1Collect first-party product and pricing evidence
  2. 2Map both products to the same category criteria
  3. 3Record criterion outcomes with confidence and sources
  4. 4Publish only when editorial gates allow indexing

Methodology version 1.0.0.

Independent

Affiliate relationships never change comparison outcomes. We evaluate both products on the same criteria and allow ties when evidence does not support a universal winner.

Read full methodology →

Some visit links may be affiliate links — we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Comparison outcomes are never based on commission.

Affiliate disclosure: some links may be affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Rankings and scores are never based on commission. Full disclosure

Methodology disclosure: scores and recommendations follow SoftwareGlimpse evaluation criteria (version 1.0.0). Affiliate relationships do not determine rankings.

How we recommend: product claims are tied to recorded research where available.

AI-assisted disclosure: drafts may be AI-assisted from approved facts and assessments. Humans approve publishable editorial judgments. AI does not invent live prices or claim hands-on testing.