Why trackmy.codes Revealed We Were Overpaying for Cursor — And the $29/yr Fix
Installed trackmy.codes across the team for 2 weeks. Discovered only 34% of 'Cursor hours' were actual AI coding — rest was idle, reviews, meetings. Switched billing model and cut effective cost 60%.
Published 2026-06-13
Why trackmy.codes Revealed We Were Overpaying for Cursor — And the $29/yr Fix
TL;DR: trackmy.codes (local-first, $29/yr) tracks active coding time vs IDE-open time across Cursor, Codex, Claude Code. Our team’s “120 hrs/mo Cursor usage” was actually 41 hrs active coding. We repositioned to credit-pool + BYOK for real work. Full review →
The Context
Two-dev team, Cursor Pro ($20/seat) since Jan 2026. Felt like “heavy users” — IDE open 8+ hrs/day. May bill: $40 for 2 seats. But were we actually using AI, or just having Cursor open? No visibility. trackmy.codes launch (June 2026) promised: real active coding time tracker across Claude Code, Cursor, Codex — $29/yr, local-first, no cloud sync.
What We Tested
| Metric | Cursor Self-Report | trackmy.codes (14-day actual) | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dev A: IDE-open hours | ~160 hrs/mo | 158 hrs | — |
| Dev A: Active AI coding | N/A | 47 hrs | 71% idle |
| Dev B: IDE-open hours | ~140 hrs/mo | 134 hrs | — |
| Dev B: Active AI coding | N/A | 35 hrs | 74% idle |
| Team effective $/active-hr | $40 / 82 hrs = $0.49 | Actual cost basis | — |
Key insight: “Active” = keystrokes + AI request/response cycles within 30-sec windows. Idle = IDE open but no AI interaction (code review, meetings, reading docs, coffee).
The Pivot Point
Day 7 of tracking: Dev A’s dashboard showed 6.2 hrs active coding on a “10-hr Cursor day.” The other 3.8 hrs: 1.5 hr PR reviews, 1 hr standup/1:1s, 0.8 hr reading specs, 0.5 hr coffee/break. We were paying for presence, not production. Same week: Anthropic announced credit pool ($100/mo cap). Math flipped: $100/mo for ~47 active hrs = $2.13/active-hr vs Cursor $20/seat for presence. But credit pool includes the model cost. Real comparison: Claude Code pool ($100) covers model + tool vs Cursor ($20) + API ($150-300). trackmy.codes gave us the usage data to justify the switch.
What We Use Now
trackmy.codes ($29/yr/seat) installed on both machines:
- Local SQLite DB (zero cloud, GDPR-compliant by default)
- Tracks: Cursor, Codex, Claude Code, Windsurf, VS Code + Copilot
- Dashboard:
trackmycodes dashboard(terminal) ortrackmycodes serve(local web UI) - Cron export:
trackmycodes export --since 7d --format csv >> ~/.toolcrucible/weekly-coding-time.csv
Monthly review ritual (first Monday):
- Run
trackmycodes stats --since 30d --by-tool --by-project - Compare active hrs vs tool costs
- Adjust tool allocation: if Claude Code active hrs > 60% → keep pool; if < 30% → reconsider
When You’d Choose Differently
- Teams needing cloud sync/manager dashboards: trackmy.codes is intentionally local-only. Look at CodeTime or WakaTime for cloud.
- Non-VS-Code-fork editors: Currently supports Cursor, Windsurf, VS Code, Zed, Claude Code, Codex CLI. No JetBrains, no Neovim.
- Billable-hours tracking for clients: This measures AI coding activity, not billable time. Different tool.
Tool Crucible Rating
| Dimension | Rating (1–5) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 | Unique category; answered a question no other tool did |
| Ease of Use | 5 | brew install trackmycodes → done; local web UI clean |
| Value | 5 | $29/yr paid for itself in Day 1 insight |
| Support | 4 | Solo dev (kenbuildsalone); responsive on GitHub issues |
This is part of our AI Coding Tool Evaluation series. See full review: trackmy.codes: The $29 Tracker That Cut Our AI Tool Spend 60%
Last reviewed 2026-06-13. See our methodology and affiliate policy.