The short version
Price first, because it does not favour us
Most comparison pages bury pricing near the bottom and present it in whatever framing flatters the author. Here it goes first, because a reader can check these numbers in about thirty seconds and a page that shades them has burned its credibility for everything that follows.
So: SaaSJet is cheaper at three of the four paid tiers, by a few cents per user. Pact is cheaper at the smallest paid tier, also by a few cents. Anyone arguing that this decides which SLA tool you run is selling you on the wrong axis, and we are not going to be the ones doing it. The rest of this page is about the axes that actually differ.
One pricing difference that is not about the per-user rate: what sits behind the paywall. In Pact the issue panel, the full policy configuration and the at-risk and breach emails are free on every project at any team size — the paid surface is the compliance report, the breached-issue drill-down and the CSV exports. Compare that against what each product’s free tier gives you, rather than against the headline rate.
What both apps do
Jira Software has no native SLAs; that engine belongs to Jira Service Management. Both apps therefore compute a clock from the change history Jira already records, show its state on the issue, and notify people as a deadline approaches.
SLA Time and Report describes itself on its listing as an app that measures time to SLA, prevents breaches, and delivers compliance reports and dashboards, summarising the workflow as “set SLA goals, track time to SLA, and get automated breach alerts”, with monitoring across projects for service desk and ITSM teams. Pact does the same core job with a narrower scope and a different starting point.
On scale: read from Marketplace public data in August 2026, SLA Time and Report had roughly 740 active installs, 99 reviews and a 4.56 average rating. Pact is new and has none of that history. If a track record is the requirement, that is the answer.
Where Pact differs
It starts configured
The listed workflow for SLA Time and Report begins with setting SLA goals — a reasonable design, and the one nearly every SLA tool uses. Pact inverts it. Open an issue, choose Apps → SLA, and a default SLA derived from that project’s own statuses is already on screen before you have configured anything.
The reason to care is what happens during an evaluation. A blank policy editor asks you to make five decisions — which statuses run the clock, which settle it, what the budget is, what the at-risk threshold is, which calendar applies — before you can see whether the app is any good. Plenty of trials end there. Correcting a wrong default is a much smaller task than authoring a first policy, and it puts real numbers on real issues in front of you within a minute.
Alerting that will not surprise you
The email checkbox on a new Pact policy is off by default. That is unusual and deliberate: a freshly written policy is a guess about thresholds, and a background sweep runs every five minutes across every configured project. Turning alerting on is therefore something you do after watching the states settle, not something that happens when you click Save.
The same sweep is what catches the breach that produces no event. Alerting driven purely by status changes and edits misses the most dangerous issue on the board — the one nobody has touched, which slides past its deadline generating nothing for a rule to react to. Pact re-checks on a timer specifically so untouched issues still raise an alert. Each issue is emailed once per state: once at at-risk, once at breach.
Policy warnings
Three misconfigurations produce no error and no obviously broken behaviour. A status ticked as both running and stopping the clock — the stop wins, so that time is never counted and the numbers are quietly flattering. A policy with no stop status — nothing can settle, so everything eventually breaches. Two policies with the same name — the report and the alert emails become ambiguous. Pact detects all three after you save and lists them on the settings page, while you are still looking at the policy rather than weeks later.
Scoping without duplicating policies
A policy can be narrowed with Applies to — particular issue types, particular priorities, or both. Ticking type Bug and priority Highest matches only high-priority bugs, so a tight incident SLA can sit next to a loose default in the same project. Tick nothing and the policy covers everything, which is the default.
Policies also apply retroactively to issues that are already open, computed from their history. You see genuine states immediately rather than waiting for the next batch of work to flow through.
Runs on Atlassian
Pact carries Atlassian’s Runs on Atlassian badge: it runs and stores its configuration inside your own Atlassian cloud, with no external servers. Its alerts are sent through Jira’s own in-tenant notification system rather than an external mail provider, and it has no Slack integration and no outbound webhooks — both were left out precisely because they would send data outside Atlassian.
Checked on the Marketplace in August 2026, SLA Time and Report’s listing does not carry that badge. That is a statement about where processing happens and nothing more; it is not a claim about what SaaSJet does with data, and the absence of a badge does not by itself establish that an app sends anything anywhere. Verify on either listing if it matters to your security review. And keep it in proportion — around a third of the Marketplace has the badge, so it is a filter to pass rather than a reason to buy.
Where SLA Time and Report is the better fit
- Cross-project monitoring and dashboards. Its listing advertises SLA performance monitoring across projects plus compliance dashboards. Pact’s report is per-project and there is no dashboard gadget. If you need one view across a portfolio of projects, that is a real capability gap on our side.
- Cloud Fortified. SLA Time and Report holds it; Hullara does not. It covers operational maturity — reliability commitments, incident management, a bug bounty — and it is earned through operating history, not shipped as a feature. If procurement requires it, Pact does not qualify today.
- Track record. 99 reviews at 4.56 stars and several hundred teams in production. Pact has none of that.
- Price above 250 users. A few cents per user, in SaaSJet’s favour, as shown above.
- Service desk and ITSM framing. Its own summary aims at service desk and ITSM teams. Pact is built for Jira Software teams who are not running a service desk.
- Report depth. Pact’s compliance report scans up to the 300 most recent issues in a project — sized for a regular team review, not a full-history audit.
We have deliberately not enumerated SaaSJet’s feature list beyond what its own listing states. We have not audited the product, and describing a competitor’s software from guesswork is how comparison pages become useless.
Running both side by side
Both apps read the same Jira change history and neither writes to your issues, so evaluating them together for a fortnight changes nothing about your data or your workflows.
- Install Pact, open an issue via Apps → SLA, and check the default SLA against a workflow you know well. Either the inference is sensible on your statuses or it is not — that is the fastest signal this page can offer.
- Adjust the starter policy in Project settings → SLA to a target you genuinely promise someone, and save. Read the policy warnings; a status that both runs and stops the clock is the common one.
- Leave email switched off at first. Watch the panel states on live issues until they match your intuition.
- Compare compliance figures carefully. Pact reports Met ÷ (Met + Breached), so in-flight work is excluded and starting a piece of work cannot lower the number. If the other tool divides by all issues, the two figures are answering different questions rather than disagreeing.
- Keep one, uninstall the other at a billing boundary. Pact’s policies and alert markers are deleted with the app, and nothing of yours left your tenant.
Questions
Also worth reading: Pact compared with Time to SLA · SLAs on Jira Software without JSM · how to track SLAs in Jira.