Chaos vs Todoist: I Used Both for 60 Days. Here's the Data.

Two task managers. Sixty days. One definitive answer—or so I hoped.

Todoist has been the default recommendation for task management for years. Fifteen million users. A decade of feature refinement. Cross-platform availability that covers everything from Apple Watch to Alexa. When someone asks "what task manager should I use?", Todoist is the safe answer.

Chaos represents a different philosophy. AI-first from the ground up. Context-aware scheduling. Automatic prioritisation. Built for the modern reality of too many tasks, too little time, and too much decision fatigue.

I spent 30 days using each exclusively—not casually, but as my sole task management system across work and personal life. I tracked specific metrics: time spent on task management, tasks completed, task completion rate, and subjective stress levels. The goal wasn't to declare a winner but to understand which system serves which user best.

The results surprised me. Here's everything I learned.

Methodology: How I Tested

Fair comparison required controlled methodology. Both apps got my complete commitment for their testing period. No cheating with the other app. No hybrid approaches. Full immersion.

During each 30-day period, I tracked:

Time spent on task management: Toggl running whenever I was in the app, adding tasks, reviewing lists, or making decisions about what to do next.

Tasks created: Total count, categorised by project.

Tasks completed: Total count with completion rate percentage.

Overdue tasks: Count at end of each day.

Decision time: Subjective rating (1-5) of how quickly I could decide what to work on next.

Stress level: Daily evening rating (1-10) of task-related anxiety.

Qualitative observations: Daily journal entries about friction points, positive experiences, and unexpected discoveries.

Both periods included similar workload: client projects, content creation, administrative tasks, personal errands, and household management. Neither period was unusually busy or light.

I should disclose: I approached this comparison hoping Todoist would win. It's established, respected, and I had years of familiarity with it. The newer, AI-heavy approach of Chaos seemed potentially gimmicky. I expected to validate my existing preference.

That's not what happened.

Todoist: The 30-Day Experience

Todoist felt like coming home. The interface is clean and familiar. Creating tasks is fast—natural language parsing means "email Sarah about proposal Friday 2pm" becomes a task with the right due date and time without additional clicks.

Strengths: Where Todoist Excels

Power user features give you fine-grained control. Filters let you create custom views: "overdue & @work" shows overdue tasks with the work label. Labels enable tagging across projects. Priority levels (P1-P4) provide urgency indication. Sections within projects create organisation hierarchy.

The integration ecosystem is genuinely impressive. Todoist connects to over 80 apps natively, plus Zapier/IFTTT for custom automation. Gmail integration adds emails as tasks. Calendar sync shows tasks in your calendar. Slack integration enables task creation from messages.

Templates save time for recurring project structures. Client onboarding, weekly reviews, travel planning—any repeating project type can be templated and deployed with a click.

Cross-platform availability covers everything. iOS, Android, macOS, Windows, Linux, web, browser extensions, Apple Watch, Wear OS, and voice assistants. Whatever device you're on, Todoist is there.

Collaboration features enable shared projects with team members. Comments, file attachments, and activity logs support team coordination.

Weaknesses: Where Todoist Falls Short

Decision fatigue remained my primary frustration. Every time I opened Todoist to decide what to work on, I faced choices: which project view, which filter, which of the many tasks visible deserves attention now. The flexibility that enables power users creates cognitive overhead for everyone.

Manual prioritisation requires ongoing attention. Tasks don't automatically adjust priority as deadlines approach or contexts change. A task marked P2 last week remains P2 even if circumstances have shifted. Staying organised in Todoist requires the discipline of regular review and manual re-prioritisation.

No calendar integration beyond sync. Todoist shows tasks in your calendar, but it doesn't help you schedule them. When should you actually do this task? That's your problem to figure out.

Setup time is substantial. Getting Todoist configured well—filters that work for your workflow, labels that make sense, project hierarchy that fits your life—takes hours of deliberate design. The default setup is too generic to be maximally useful.

Data: Todoist by the Numbers

Over 30 days with Todoist:

Tasks created: 342 Tasks completed: 289 Completion rate: 84.5% Time spent in app: 412 minutes (about 14 minutes daily) Average daily overdue tasks: 4.7 Average decision time rating: 2.8/5 (moderate difficulty deciding) Average stress rating: 5.4/10

The completion rate pleased me. The time spent and decision time ratings concerned me. Over six hours monthly just managing tasks feels like overhead, especially when much of that time was spent deciding what to do rather than doing it.

Chaos: The 30-Day Experience

Chaos required attitude adjustment from the start. The interface presents tasks differently—not as lists to review but as recommendations for what to do now. The AI analyses your calendar, deadlines, context, and patterns to suggest what deserves attention.

Strengths: Where Chaos Excels

AI prioritisation eliminated decision fatigue almost immediately. When I open Chaos, I see what it recommends I do right now, based on my calendar availability, task deadlines, energy patterns it's learned, and current context. Instead of reviewing a list and choosing, I evaluate a recommendation and either do it or tell Chaos why not.

Calendar-native design integrates tasks and time. Chaos doesn't just sync to your calendar—it thinks in calendar terms. Tasks have estimated durations. The AI suggests when to schedule tasks based on calendar gaps. The question isn't just "what should I do" but "when should I do it."

Context awareness adapts to your situation. Location, time of day, energy levels—Chaos learns patterns and adjusts recommendations accordingly. Errands surface when I'm near the relevant location. Deep work surfaces during my historically productive hours.

Minimal setup works immediately. I added my calendar, imported tasks, and Chaos started being useful within minutes. No hours of filter design or label taxonomy creation required.

Natural language task capture works well. Voice input is particularly smooth—"remind me to call the accountant after my meeting tomorrow" becomes a task scheduled for after my tomorrow meeting ends.

Weaknesses: Where Chaos Falls Short

Less manual control frustrates power users accustomed to fine-grained customisation. You can't create the intricate filter combinations Todoist enables. For users who've invested in building sophisticated Todoist workflows, Chaos feels like losing tools.

Fewer integrations limit ecosystem connectivity. Chaos connects to calendar, email, and a few other services, but the 80+ app integration library of Todoist doesn't exist yet. Power users with complex automation requirements will hit limits.

Newer means less refined. Occasional bugs, features that feel not-quite-finished, and a smaller community for troubleshooting. Todoist has ten years of polish; Chaos doesn't yet.

Higher pricing challenges cost-conscious users. Chaos costs approximately £96 annually versus Todoist's £36 for Pro. That's meaningful difference for feature sets that overlap substantially.

Data: Chaos by the Numbers

Over 30 days with Chaos:

Tasks created: 367 Tasks completed: 334 Completion rate: 91.0% Time spent in app: 198 minutes (about 6.6 minutes daily) Average daily overdue tasks: 1.2 Average decision time rating: 4.4/5 (easy decisions) Average stress rating: 3.8/10

The differences jumped out. More tasks completed despite creating more (the AI encouraged capturing things I'd previously kept in my head). Less time spent managing tasks—cut in half. Fewer overdue tasks accumulating. Easier decisions. Lower stress.

The completion rate increase from 84.5% to 91% might seem modest, but across 300+ tasks, that's 20+ additional tasks completed—without working more hours.

Feature-by-Feature Comparison

Breaking down specific features helps clarify which tool serves which need.

Task Capture

Todoist: Excellent natural language parsing, quick add from keyboard shortcuts, email forwarding, browser extensions for capturing web pages.

Chaos: Strong natural language including voice, context-aware capture that suggests related projects, but fewer entry points (no browser extension, more limited email forwarding).

Winner: Todoist, but narrowly. More capture methods and more refined parsing.

Organisation

Todoist: Projects, sections, labels, filters, priority levels. Highly customisable hierarchy.

Chaos: Projects and tags, simpler structure. AI handles much of the organisation traditionally requiring manual taxonomy.

Winner: Depends on preference. Todoist for control enthusiasts. Chaos for those who prefer automatic organisation.

Prioritisation

Todoist: Manual P1-P4 assignment. Requires ongoing review and adjustment.

Chaos: AI auto-prioritisation based on deadlines, calendar, context, and learned patterns. Recommendations rather than lists.

Winner: Chaos, clearly. The AI prioritisation delivers genuine value, eliminating decision fatigue that accumulates with manual systems.

Scheduling

Todoist: Due dates and reminders. Calendar sync shows tasks but doesn't suggest scheduling.

Chaos: Due dates plus estimated duration plus AI scheduling suggestions. Calendar-native thinking about when tasks fit.

Winner: Chaos. Integrating tasks and calendar as unified system solves problems that treating them separately cannot.

Collaboration

Todoist: Shared projects, assignees, comments, file attachments. Solid team features.

Chaos: Limited collaboration features. Primarily individual-focused.

Winner: Todoist, substantially. Teams should choose Todoist.

Integrations

Todoist: 80+ native integrations plus Zapier/IFTTT. Calendar, email, Slack, CRM, development tools, and more.

Chaos: Calendar, email, limited additional integrations. Growing but not comparable.

Winner: Todoist. The integration ecosystem is genuinely valuable for connected workflows.

Mobile Experience

Todoist: Polished apps for iOS and Android. Widgets, watch apps, voice assistant integration.

Chaos: Good mobile apps, improving. Voice capture is excellent. Widgets adequate.

Winner: Todoist, but not by much. Both are usable daily; Todoist is slightly more refined.

Learning Curve

Todoist: Low initial curve, steep curve for advanced features. Getting basic value is easy; unlocking full potential takes significant investment.

Chaos: Very low curve throughout. AI handles complexity; user doesn't need to learn it.

Winner: Chaos. More value faster with less investment.

Pricing

Todoist Free: Limited to 5 projects, 5 collaborators. Adequate for simple needs. Todoist Pro: £36/year. Full feature set for individuals. Todoist Business: £48/user/year. Team features.

Chaos: £96/year. Single tier with full features.

Winner: Todoist on price. £60 annual difference is meaningful.

Use Case Scenarios

Different users should choose different tools. These scenarios guide the decision.

Scenario: Freelancer with Multiple Clients

Sarah manages projects for 8 clients simultaneously. She needs clear separation between clients, ability to see all tasks across clients, and occasionally shares projects with clients for collaboration.

Recommendation: Todoist. The project/filter/label system handles multi-client organisation well. Collaboration features enable client sharing. Integrations connect her tools.

Scenario: Knowledge Worker with Too Many Tasks

Marcus is drowning. His task list has 200+ items. He spends more time managing tasks than doing them. Every morning starts with "what should I work on?" paralysis.

Recommendation: Chaos. The AI prioritisation solves his core problem. He doesn't need intricate organisation; he needs something to tell him what matters now.

Scenario: Developer with GitHub Workflow

Jamie wants tasks connected to code. When PRs merge, related tasks should close. Sprint planning should sync between project management and personal tasks.

Recommendation: Todoist. GitHub integration, Jira integration, and broader developer tool ecosystem make it the practical choice. Chaos doesn't have these connections yet.

Scenario: Creative Professional with Unpredictable Schedule

Elena's days are never the same. Client calls appear unexpectedly. Creative energy fluctuates. She needs flexibility more than structure.

Recommendation: Chaos. Calendar-native design and context awareness adapt to variable schedules. The AI learns her patterns and adjusts recommendations accordingly.

Scenario: Team Leader Coordinating Projects

David manages a team of 6. He needs shared projects, visibility into who's doing what, and accountability tracking.

Recommendation: Todoist. Collaboration features are essential for team coordination. Chaos is individual-focused and lacks team management capabilities.

Scenario: ADHD Brain Struggling with Task Initiation

Alex knows what needs to be done but struggles to start. Decision paralysis is real. Too many options create overwhelm.

Recommendation: Chaos. AI recommendations reduce choices. Instead of "pick from 50 tasks," the experience becomes "do this or tell me why not." Lower activation energy for task initiation.

The Decision Tree

If you need team collaboration: choose Todoist. Chaos isn't built for teams.

If you need extensive integrations: choose Todoist. The ecosystem is mature and comprehensive.

If you love manual control: choose Todoist. Fine-grained customisation serves power users well.

If price is primary concern: choose Todoist. £36 versus £96 is significant savings.

If you suffer from decision fatigue: choose Chaos. AI prioritisation addresses the root cause.

If you want calendar-integrated task management: choose Chaos. The unified approach solves problems separate systems cannot.

If you want minimal setup time: choose Chaos. Immediate value without configuration investment.

If you struggle with task initiation: choose Chaos. Recommendations rather than lists reduce activation energy.

Migration Considerations

Switching between task managers carries cost. Consider carefully before moving.

Moving from Todoist to Chaos

Export Todoist tasks as CSV. Chaos imports this directly. Projects map reasonably well. Labels become tags.

What you'll lose: complex filters, refined labels, integrations built over time.

What you'll gain: AI prioritisation, calendar integration, reduced decision fatigue.

Migration time: approximately 30-60 minutes for full task import plus learning period.

Moving from Chaos to Todoist

Export from Chaos, import to Todoist. Tasks transfer with dates and basic metadata.

What you'll lose: AI scheduling suggestions, context awareness, calendar-native task management.

What you'll gain: integrations, collaboration, community resources, lower price.

Migration time: approximately 30-60 minutes plus significant configuration time to build filters and workflow.

Hybrid Approach

Some users run both: Todoist for collaborative projects with extensive integration needs, Chaos for personal task management where AI prioritisation adds value.

The overhead of two systems is real—but for certain workflows, specialisation beats generalisation.

My Honest Recommendation

After 60 days of deliberate testing, my recommendation isn't "Chaos is better" or "Todoist is better." It's "these tools solve different problems, and you should choose based on which problem you have."

If your primary challenge is organisation—keeping track of many tasks across many projects with many collaborators—Todoist's mature system handles this well. The decade of refinement shows. The integration ecosystem creates genuine value.

If your primary challenge is execution—deciding what to do, starting tasks, managing energy across a variable schedule—Chaos addresses root causes that Todoist doesn't touch. The AI prioritisation is not gimmick; it's genuine capability that changes how you interact with your task list.

I expected to validate my Todoist preference. Instead, I switched to Chaos as my primary tool.

The data convinced me: half the time spent managing tasks, higher completion rate, dramatically lower stress. The AI recommendations transformed "what should I do now?" from daily agony into answered question.

But I kept Todoist for shared projects with clients. The collaboration features are necessary, and running two systems costs less than the productivity loss of fighting either tool's limitations.

Your optimal choice depends on your specific situation. Both tools are excellent at what they do. Choose based on what you need done.

Key Takeaways

Todoist excels at organisation, collaboration, and integration. Fifteen million users and a decade of refinement created genuinely powerful task management. Choose Todoist if: you work in teams, need extensive integrations, love manual control, or prioritise cost.

Chaos excels at execution, prioritisation, and calendar integration. AI-first design addresses decision fatigue and task initiation challenges. Choose Chaos if: you struggle with too many tasks, suffer decision paralysis, want calendar-native task management, or want minimal setup.

The 60-day data showed meaningful differences: Chaos delivered higher completion rates (91% vs 84.5%), less time in-app (6.6 vs 14 minutes daily), fewer overdue tasks (1.2 vs 4.7 daily), easier decisions (4.4 vs 2.8 rating), and lower stress (3.8 vs 5.4 rating).

Neither tool is universally better. Both are genuinely excellent at their respective strengths. Match the tool to your problem rather than assuming one solution fits all needs.

Migration between tools takes 30-60 minutes plus learning/configuration time. Consider a trial period before committing either direction.

Hybrid approaches work for some users—Todoist for collaboration and integrations, Chaos for personal AI-powered task management.