Point estimates set the plan in Linear; Everhour tracks hours against issues so teams can review the gap.
Try with my Linear
$10k of $15k
Hourly
0:00:00
Alejandro Luna0:00:00Kai Nani0:00:00Kai Nani0:00:00Click!
Dave Jung0:00:00Alejandro Luna0:00:00Dave JungThe calculator gives you the number — Everhour takes it from there.
One click and you're timing. Start a timer, add an entry, edit the details. This is exactly how it feels in Everhour.
Set a budget, assign rates, and get alerted before you're over.
Measurement
Track your budget through time or costs
Every report you need — configured your way, always up to date.
Tracked hours flow straight into a polished invoice — no copy-paste, no manual math.
Your team plans Linear issues with estimate points, then needs a time-based view of the work after delivery. The practical question is whether the point estimate matched the hours people logged on the issue, project, or cycle window. That comparison helps you separate a planning miss from a recording problem.
A useful review starts at the issue level. Pick the issue, confirm the estimate value, review the assignee and project context, then compare the logged hours tied to that work. A large gap does not automatically mean the estimate was wrong. It can also mean the team split work across issues, logged time late, or used points inconsistently.
Linear estimate values represent effort or size, not clock time. Teams can use Exponential, Fibonacci, Linear, or T-Shirt estimate scales, including values such as 1-2-3-5-8 or XS-S-M-L-XL. Those values work for planning scope, while hours, rates, costs, payroll figures, and invoice lines need separate time records.
Treat the point-to-hour comparison as an observation, not a conversion table. A 3-point issue taking 12 hours does not mean every point equals 4 hours. It means that one issue, with its context and uncertainty, took 12 hours. Over several projects, repeated gaps show where estimates need tighter issue slicing, clearer acceptance criteria, or a different planning discussion.
A good variance review asks why the issue changed shape. Under-scoped work usually shows up as extra implementation, review, testing, or rework that still belongs to the same issue. Unrecorded time shows up differently: comments, commits, or status changes indicate work happened, while the hour log stays thin or arrives after the fact.
Cycles give the review a natural time window. Compare issue estimates and tracked hours for the dates that match the cycle period, then look for patterns by project, assignee, status, or tag. Do not collapse every finding into a single average. One oversized issue can hide a group of smaller issues where the planning model worked.
A one-off comparison is enough when you only need to check whether a project ran close to plan. Export the issue list, add the estimate values, attach the tracked hours, and write down the reason for any major variance. That gives the next planning meeting a concrete reference instead of a memory-based debate.
A managed workflow becomes useful when estimates affect budgets, staffing, billing, or payroll review. Everhour can sync Linear project and issue data, add timer and manual logging controls through its browser extension, and report estimated, remaining, and over-estimate hours. That turns estimate accuracy into a track record across projects instead of a one-project guess.
This content is for general information only, may not be fully up to date, and is provided without any warranty or liability.
High Performer
G2
Summer 2026
Best Ease Of Use
Capterra
Summer 2026
Rated in the top time trackers across G2, Capterra, and TrustRadius — with consistent praise for ease of use, integrations, and support.
Linear estimate points should stay separate from hours. Points describe effort or size for planning, while hours record time actually spent. Comparing the two helps you judge estimate accuracy, but a point value is not a clock-time total or a cost figure.
The useful details are the issue estimate, assignee, project, status, cycle window, labels, and any tags synced into the reporting layer. Those fields explain the context behind the variance. A late-stage bug, a blocked review, and a broad feature issue can all show different point-to-hour behavior.
Start with the issue history before changing the estimating scale. A gap can mean the work was under-scoped, split poorly, delayed by review, or logged incompletely. The action changes by cause: adjust future estimates for scope misses, improve issue breakdown for oversized work, or tighten time entry habits for missing records.
Cycle planning can use both, as long as each measure keeps its role. Points help size the planned issue scope. Tracked hours show time actually spent during the cycle dates. Reviewing both after the cycle gives the team evidence for future capacity discussions without treating points as a payroll or billing measure.
The common mistake is averaging points and hours without checking issue shape. A narrow bug, a research task, and a multi-step feature do not carry the same planning risk. Review major outliers first, then compare similar issue types across projects to find patterns that deserve a process change.
Everhour Overtimes can apply daily and weekly overtime limits, show overtime in Team Hours, and calculate overtime pay from employee hourly cost and tracked time. For teams logging time on Linear issues, that creates a payroll review layer separate from point-based planning.
Everhour syncs Linear workspace, project, issue, status, and tag data into reports, then lets teams log time with timers or manual entries through embedded controls. Reports can show task estimates, progress, remaining time, and over-estimate hours for review.
Track Linear issue hours in Everhour, review overtime where payroll needs it, and turn estimate variance into clearer future budgets.
14-day free trial · No credit card · Cancel anytime
