Clock PMS+ · PMS Power Index

Composite score: 41.3 / 100 (published snapshot v2026.5, 2026-08-13)

Clock PMS+ scores 41.3 out of 100 on the PMS Power Index. Evidence-backed diagnostic across ten API capabilities. Vendor-neutral. Open to dispute.

Scores by capability

Marketplace coverage

Score: 6 of 9 (Adequate). Weight 10%.

First scorer rationale: clock-software.com/products/integrations lists approximately 175-200 named integrations across 16+ named categories, well exceeding anchor_6's 50-150 / 6+ category threshold. Clock does not use "certified" terminology for these integrations, and no published certification process is evidenced, so anchor_9 ("150+ certified integrations... active partner programme with published certification process") is not supported. Score lands at anchor_6. [Provenance and figure correction — 2026-08-12] The figures in the base rationale above are superseded. The base text asserts approximately 175-200 named integrations across 16 or more named categories and cites clock-software.com/products/integrations. No evidence row capturing that surface existed on this record at the time of publication, no capture was made by the evidence pass named in the v2026.4 snapshot regeneration reason, and the only linked row, d67b93b7, was drawn from a partner onboarding article and states the contrary. Both asserted figures are also incorrect. The surface has now been captured directly. The page declares 232 integrations across thirteen named categories, not 175-200 across 16 or more. The corrected figures are 232 and 13. The score is unchanged at 6 and is now evidenced. Anchor_6 requires 50 to 150 integrations across 6 or more categories; 232 across 13 exceeds both thresholds. Anchor_9 requires 150 or more certified integrations, 8 or more categories, and an active partner programme with a published certification process. The count and category thresholds are cleared. The certification leg is not: the captured surface uses no 'certified' terminology and publishes no certification process. Anchor_9 therefore fails on the certification condition alone, which is the reasoning the base rationale reached on unevidenced figures and which now holds on captured evidence. Row d67b93b7 is retained as historical record. Its negative finding is superseded in respect of integration count and category breadth, which it assessed against a partner onboarding surface that could not carry either answer. Its account of the two integration types is unaffected. The classification of statutory and fiscalisation exports under the Legal category, and of room-access hardware, as integrations counting toward breadth on the same footing as commercial partner integrations, is referred to the review agenda as a cohort-wide rubric question. It is not resolved here and no vendor-specific adjustment is made on it.

  • Clock PMS+ integrations are published on Hotel Tech Report, confirming established industry solution partnerships, and the vendor describes two integration types: Established Industry Solutions (HTR-listed) and Custom Project Integrations. No certified-integration count is publicly evidenced and clear 6+ category breadth (RMS, CRS, guest communications, etc.) is not demonstrated on the surfaces reviewed, so anchor_6 of the integration breadth rubric is not cleared. https://developers.clock-software.com/support/solutions/articles/9000221956-1-before-you-start
  • The Clock PMS+ integrations page declares 232 integrations under an 'All (232)' filter, distributed across thirteen named category filters with individual counts: Distribution (22), Room access (30), Payments (1), Accounting (3), Revenue management (20), Guest platforms (47), Customer relationships (10), Reputation (7), Operations management (12), Business intelligence (14), F&B Point of sale (21), Legal (32), Others (14). Named partners are listed individually under each category. The page carries no use of 'certified' terminology for these integrations and no published certification process. The page states that integration is available at no extra charge and directs developers to the Clock API. The canonical host serving this content is www.clock-software.com; the non-www form redirects. https://www.clock-software.com/products/integrations

What you can control via the API

Score: 6 of 9 (Adequate). Weight 14%.

First scorer rationale: Adjusted to 6 on cross-vendor review. Anchor_9 requires writable folios, rate plans, room moves, housekeeping, and guest profile — all five evidenced. Clock PMS+ documentation describes API support for "most operations performable in the system" (vendor language), which confirms the core reservation lifecycle and folio posting are writable but does not specifically evidence rate plan writes, room moves, or housekeeping endpoints. Solid (6) until those three are individually evidenced.

Real-time updates and webhooks

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 13%.

First scorer rationale: A notification mechanism is confirmed (PUSH, PULL and SQS message channels for certain events such as booking confirmed). Anchor_6 of the event-driven capability rubric requires signed payloads and delivery confirmation across core reservation and folio events; the event catalogue and payload schemas are not prominently documented, and no payload signing or delivery confirmation mechanism is evidenced. A working notification surface is therefore confirmed, but anchor_6's integrity controls are not, which matches anchor_3.

  • Clock PMS+ provides a notification system for certain events via the API. Message channels include PUSH, PULL and SQS notification patterns confirmed in the developer documentation API types listing. The event catalogue and payload schemas are not prominently documented, and no payload signing or delivery-confirmation mechanism is evidenced, so anchor_6 of the event-driven capability rubric is not cleared. https://developers.clock-software.com/support/solutions/articles/9000221951-1-check-the-api-specs

Readiness for AI agents

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 12%.

First scorer rationale: Clock PMS+ scores 0 (Absent). No MCP server, no agent-callable tool surface, no OpenAPI/JSON Schema published for LLM consumption, no AI agent or agentic workflow positioning found on any developer or marketing page. Cloud-native architecture is present but no AI-readiness signals of any kind were found. Below even the Limited anchor — there is no documented AI-adjacent surface for third-party consumption. [Anchor correction — 2026-08-12] Corrected 0 to 3 as a demonstrated factual error in anchor application. The stored anchor_0 condition requires that no structured API and no public schema exist and that the system is not callable by an agent without bespoke integration work. No evidence row on this record establishes that condition. Linked row 8212b810 establishes the absence of MCP, LLM-consumable schema, agent-callable tool surface and agentic positioning, which is a different finding and remains accurate. The record establishes the contrary on the anchor_0 condition, on rows held against other dimensions: b63b07a1 (operational_programmability) records fully public REST API documentation at api-docs.clock-software.com requiring no login; 0944ee6a (operational_programmability) records a publicly accessible Postman collection. These rows are cited as record references and are not linked to this dimension. Position between anchors is disclosed under methodology §8b. Anchor_3 requires a documented REST API with no structured tool schema, no webhook support and no agent-facing primitives. The first, second and fourth conditions are met on the record. The third is not: row 64686396 (event_driven_capability) records PUSH, PULL and SQS notification patterns in the developer documentation. Clock PMS+ therefore sits above anchor_0 and does not fully satisfy anchor_3. Anchor_3 is recorded as the nearest supportable anchor and the between-anchors position is disclosed rather than resolved. A corroborating ai_readiness-dimension capture is scheduled for the next review. Provenance note on the linked row: 8212b810 stores a source_url of the developer root and an archive_url capturing /support/home. The two are different surfaces. The row is retained and its finding is unchanged. This correction applies the stored rubric to evidence already on the record. It is not a capability re-judgement and no score is reduced.

  • No explicit AI agent or agentic workflow positioning found on Clock PMS+ developer or marketing pages. Cloud-native architecture confirmed. No MCP server, OpenAPI/JSON schema for LLM consumption, or agent-callable tool surface documented publicly. https://developers.clock-software.com/

Data model and multi-property design

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 10%.

First scorer rationale: Single-property feature coverage is confirmed across bookings, guests, rooms, room types, rates, occupancy forecasts and charge templates. Anchor_6 of the data model depth rubric requires a true multi-property hierarchy in the data model and a shared cross-property guest profile; neither is evidenced for Clock PMS+. Feature breadth is confirmed but multi-property architecture is not, matching anchor_3 (multi-property exists as separate instances; reporting requires export).

  • API covers bookings (create/view/update), guests, rooms, room types, rates, occupancy forecasts and charge templates, confirmed across multiple changelog entries and Postman collection folders. No multi-property hierarchy, chain construct, or shared cross-property guest profile is evidenced in the developer surface reviewed, so anchor_6 of the data model depth rubric is not cleared. https://api-docs.clock-software.com/

Developer tooling and sandbox

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 10%.

First scorer rationale: A dedicated developer centre at developers.clock-software.com and a Postman workspace are confirmed. Anchor_6 of the developer experience rubric requires a self-serve sandbox; the vendor states sandbox access is available on request rather than self-serve, which is the defining phrase of anchor_3 ("sandbox available on request"). The developer surface is real but the sandbox model is request-based, matching anchor_3.

  • Dedicated developer centre at developers.clock-software.com. Vendor states the API exposes most of the data available in Clock PMS and supports most of the operations which can be performed in the system. Sandbox account is available on request rather than self-serve, which matches the defining phrase of anchor_3 of the developer experience rubric. https://developers.clock-software.com/

Uptime and operational discipline

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 9%.

First scorer rationale: Anchor_6 of the production reliability rubric requires an automated status page with 90-day history and a published uptime SLA of 99.5% or higher. No public SLA, no uptime page and no status dashboard is evidenced for Clock PMS+. This is the same fact pattern that triggered the 3.C 6→3 correction for HotelKey, RMS Cloud and Roommaster; applied consistently here, the evidence lands at anchor_3 (status page exists but is manually updated; no historical uptime data; no published SLA).

  • Clock PMS+ is a cloud-native SaaS PMS deployed across 65+ countries. The vendor states the API is always publicly available and maintains an active changelog indicating continuous production deployment cadence. No public SLA, no uptime page and no status dashboard is evidenced, so anchor_6 of the production reliability rubric is not cleared — the same fact pattern that triggered the 3.C correction for HotelKey, RMS Cloud and Roommaster. https://developers.clock-software.com/

Security, authentication, and compliance

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 8%.

First scorer rationale: Holds at 3 on cross-vendor review. Anchor_6 requires OAuth 2.0 plus SOC 2 or ISO 27001 plus a published GDPR DPA — all three publicly verifiable. Partner onboarding requires a pilot customer to be identified before integration begins (governed process). OAuth 2.0 presence is not confirmed in public documentation; PCI/SOC 2/ISO 27001 not evidenced. Adequate (3) until OAuth and at least one certification are publicly verifiable.

Partner programme and references

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 7%.

First scorer rationale: Deployment scale is confirmed (cloud platform in production since 2013, deployed across 65+ countries, HTR-listed). Anchor_6 of the ecosystem maturity rubric requires a self-serve partner programme with published tiers, an active developer forum or community, and a publicly searchable partner directory. None of these programme-infrastructure elements are publicly evidenced for Clock PMS+. Installed-base scale does not satisfy anchor_6 under the same standard applied to other vendors in 3.A, matching anchor_3. Note: the developer portal offers a setup guide and ticket-based support only; no published tiers, forum, or partner directory are evidenced (third-party sources list approximately 16 partners, below anchor_6's directory-scale expectation).

  • Clock PMS+ is deployed in 65+ countries since launching its cloud platform in 2013 (founded 1994), with presence across European, Middle Eastern and global independent hotel markets, and an all-in-one platform including PMS, booking engine, channel manager, kiosk and POS. Deployment scale is confirmed; no self-serve partner programme, published partner tiers, developer forum or publicly searchable partner directory is evidenced, so anchor_6 of the ecosystem maturity rubric is not cleared. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_Software

Documentation and changelog discipline

Score: 3 of 9 (Limited). Weight 7%.

First scorer rationale: Adjusted to 3 on owner review. Anchor_6 requires an explicit versioning policy in public documentation; none was found for Clock PMS+. Public Postman workspace, March 2026 changelog entries at api-docs.clock-software.com, and structured developer-centre guides remain solid supporting evidence for endpoint coverage and recency, but absent a public versioning policy the dimension defaults to Adequate (3). Multi-language SDKs/code samples, explicit deprecation policy, and a complete error reference are also not evidenced. Note: a dated changelog is confirmed (Postman workspace "clockintegrations/clock-pms-integrations-s-public-workspace," most recent entry 2026-03-30), but no versioning or deprecation policy is evidenced. Anchor_6 requires both a changelog and a versioning policy; with only one of the two compound criteria met, the score remains at anchor_3.

Scores are published only where documented evidence exists. Corrections and disputes are recorded in the public changelog. The scoring rubric is published in full in the methodology.

This provider is listed in the HotelLogic marketplace →

Rank 11 of 17 scored vendors on the PMS Power Index ladder.