Cube vs. OnPlan

1) The budget process. In QBO the budgeting capability is non-existant, unless you like manually typing in every scenario and not being able to budget by class. Cube houses my budget/forecast scenarios & lets me view and analyze by my company's preferred data points; department, GL account, vendor, & sales campaign. I'm able to run monthly budget variance reports and plan for the future with ease. 2) We've begun using Cube to help analyze profitablity by sales job. We've never had such easy access to this type of info in the past, so this is a benefit I can directly attribute to Cube. 3) We're beginning now to use an integration with our payroll software to work on headcount planning and payroll analysis.

OnPlan is well suited for finance teams looking to maintain control of their corporate/financial models. Every model can be exported to Excel. In particular, for early-stage to mid-stage companies, OnPlan provides a powerful and inexpensive solution that allows for automation and customization. Another strong argument for OnPlan is their experienced CSM/IM team that helps to build the first model and acts as a sounding board with insights to improve the models. OnPlan might be less powerful for large organizations operating across multiple divisions, countries, and entities as this requires sophisticated consolidation processes and standardization, which might be difficult to maintain with OnPlan. Implementations depending on complexity can take longer due to the customization options and plethora of options to make models more accurate.

Incentivized

• Push/pull information across any Google Sheet or Excel workbook.
• Budget at a much more granular level (by month by account by the department by vendor).
• Custom mapping to allow for multiple cuts of the same data.
• Bulk range selection within a workbook.

• Integration with QBO and SFDC
• Integration with Google sheets and presentations
• User friendly and polished UE
• Easy Excel like syntax for modelling
• Flexibility to create custom formulas
• User roles and permissions
• Handling of fiscal year vs. calendar as well as switching between monthly/quarterly views

Incentivized

• Limited to 8 top line dimensions. Although you can bring in as many attributes of data as you want, but I would really like Cube to increase top line dimensions to 10.
• The ability for cross level interaction within multiples cube would be a major plus once implemented.

• Chart library or templates to quickly create polished Google charts
• More collaboration features for comments and questions to team members

Incentivized

Cube was just a lot easier to use than Vena. We took some time to look at Vena as well and while their product was impressive, our organization was not yet there. We needed something we could implement quickly, and in today's day and age I think that is a very important quality to have. Start up and early stage companies do not have the luxury of implementation teams and massive IT resources so Cube was a huge help.

Incentivized

OnPlan provided the best tradeoff for customization, integrations, affordability, user controls, and maintenance/control of the financial model.

Incentivized

• It has decreased the amount of time it takes to build reports by days
• I can rest easy knowing the knowledge is accurate and there is no human error
• I have been able to create more reports than I ever dreamed of with the new time and ease of use

Incentivized

• More cost control
• More accurate forecasts / reducing of forecasting errors
• More accurate accounting close / detection of erroneous GL entries
• Time savings to update financial model / forecasts
• Time savings to create BvA reports

Incentivized