Jirav vs. Vena

I feel that Jirav would be best suited for companies with less than 75 employees that need a more robust software than Fathom (Quickbooks Onlne integrated FP&A tool based in Australia) that is very customizable, with simple revenue modeling, few personnel changes every month, few departments, no multi currency, and need collaboration only with top-level personnel. I think Jirav is a product that is being highly recommended in the accounting industry for outsourced accounting firms, but accounting only looks at historical information and there needs to more finance industry influence, approval, and input so they can improve their product.

Whether you have processes you are looking to make more efficient or starting from scratch, Vena is a great tool to handle both. When we started with Vena all of reporting was either very manual or frankly nonexistent. Vena was pivotal in bringing us from zero to 10 in a short time. it helped us streamline the process of gathering data to the end reporting

Incentivized

• Jirav integrates well with Quickbooks Online (QBO), and I like how you can easily customize the reporting presentation by combining GL accounts and showing more or less details as needed for managerial reporting
• I like that Jirav is browser-based and that I can easily share reports with internal and external parties for comments
• I feel more confident using Jirav than I do with Excel because there is more data validation, and some notifications will appear if there are errors in the model
• The sales capacity model and ramping employees schedule that their implementation / professional services team built for us works well overall (with some limitations)
• Ideally, having a direct integration into Jirav would be great for all our data. However, some of our software didn't have a direct integration, so I was glad that Jirav offered the ability to use a connected Google Sheet that lets me input data that can be imported directly into the system

• What i like best about Vena is that it is very seamless Excel integration.
• Vena fosters collabs across teams, helping multiple members to work together on financial planning in real-time enhancing overall efficiency.
• We now also can automate manual processes like budgeting, consolidation of data and reporting saves my valuable time and also reducing the risk of errors.

Incentivized

• At times, I feel that Jirav is too customizable. It would be great if they could tailor the system to be more industry-specific. For example, if the system could provide standard formulas for SaaS industry metrics already within the system, then that would have saved me a ton of time with having to create the metrics myself. The formula creation for metrics is quite tedious as well because you can only do simple calculations, such as A + B or A x C. You cannot do A + B + C or A x B x C.
• I struggle with the way they have their staff planning set up because I have to reimport an Excel every month with all the changes (new hires, terminations, pay changes), and the changes appear to be retroactive on reports, which doesn't make sense if someone receives a raise or pay change during the year. It would be much easier for planning for bookings if they could add a column for quota by salesperson.
• If there are notifications of errors in the model, then the notifications will continue to present themselves after I resolve the issue. It would be nice if I could clear out notifications I know are not relevant anymore. I also still find errors in the system that I would have expected the system to notify me about, such as Assumptions that are set up but they are not included in any formulas, so I should delete that assumption to prevent anyone from thinking changing that assumption will impact the model.
• There is some functionality for sharing reports and information, but there is not enough granularity in security settings to allow me to share certain information easily. For example, if I want to share information with managers to manage their departments' budget, but also not see their boss' compensation, then it takes some work to set that up. Or, if I want to share a report with a recruiter of planned headcount and salary, then I need to export it to Excel first and delete Actual headcount and salary, so they don't see current employees' compensation (including the person's boss' salary).
• Customer and vendor names do not import, only the totals, so if you look at Actuals vs Plan, the actuals will show a total figure and the plan will show detail, creating the need for an external and manual reconciliation
• There is no multi-currency available
• Scenario analysis can be difficult to do quickly. For example, if I want to see the plan with planned hires and without planned hires, then I would need to create two separate plans, individually select and delete the planned hires in one plan and keep then in another plan, which is time-consuming
• Using Google Sign-In causes the system to time-out frequently for me, so I get kicked out of the system and have to log back in. If I have multiple tabs of Jirav open, then re-logging in sometimes doesn't bring me back to where I was originally at.
• You can export reports to Excel, but there are no formulas of the calculations, which makes it more difficult to understand how calculations are being performed unless you look in the browser and dig into the calculations. This also might make it more difficult if you decide to go to another software in the future since you may need to start from scratch in the next software
• Seasonality has been difficult to model. For example, the way our model is set up, I can use an assumption for Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4. However, if I update Q3 for this year, then it also updates Q3 of all subsequent years, which I don't want. A more complex model and additional maintenance would be needed to accomplish more accurate seasonality planning

• It could improve the ease of implementation; it could take a long for an inexperienced IT team.
• From the ERP system perspective, it can be linked easily, but it has room for improvement when you make core changes and require a Vena specialist again.
• Some administrators can get confused while working on Excel implementation; it has complicated technical requirements.

Incentivized

It saves me so much time - to go back I would have to hire multiple people to achieve the same results. It is a cost effective tool for our uses and continues to pay for itself in time savings.

Incentivized

This is split between usability from an end-user perspective and administrative. Administrative - The tool is lacking in a cohesive way to administer the tool, both from more of a back-end perspective (ETL/Integrations, scripting, etc.) as well as from a business administrative (Processes, Models, etc.). On the more back-end IT related aspects, the tool is a mishmash of modules that were clearly developed in stovepipe fashion. Basic feature/functionality aspects such as version control, auto vs manual save, etc. differ between the code preparation components. It is also lacking in any sort of coherent version control. Not all pages display the context information, so extreme caution must be used. There is also no coherent migration strategy. The process and model navigation has been somewhat challenging for our business administrators, often requiring assistance from Vena when creating or altering templates. 2 of 10 End User - This is better. The Excel add-in generally functions well. Creating basic templates is straightforward, and there is a large degree of flexibility when creating reporting templates. Being part of Excel puts many users into a comfort zone. The toggle switch between template and data mode is not well conceived, and the add-in pop-ups occasionally have issues on multi-monitor displays. 6 of 10

Incentivized

Vena has been available and running. There are notifications well ahead of scheduled maintenance and so far, scheduled maintenance has been occurring during off hours and fortunately has not occurred during a time that is crucial for us to be actively using.

Incentivized

Vena Solutions pages load quickly and only a few times does it get a bit slow, only when there are many integrations and the reports are long. But in general it is always fast and honestly I am very satisfied with the speed in the generation of statistical reports and the pages

Incentivized

From initiate setup to going live, Vena's customer representatives and technicians have proven to be responsive and enthusiastic in getting our company up and running. They have been patient with our questions and frustrations and worked to troubleshoot issues that have come up.

Incentivized

Our initial in person training was a little rough b/c I felt like our trainer wanted to focus on maximizing Vena rather than understanding what we were needing for our organization. He was very responsive and added insights, but could have worked to understand our needs a little better.

Incentivized

The training was structured as a group training to learn the basics of creating a data model and mapping a template. While we had nearly 10 participants, I was the only actual implementer so we probably didn't actually need the training and could have just learned the initial skills from the implementation consultant. Two years later, when we hired a new team member, they completed several modules in Vena Academy (a self paced learning course) which allowed them to get up to speed on the basics with just a bit of supplemental guidance from me as our existing admin.

Incentivized

The Vena consultant had great knowledge of both the Vena solution and Excel and Excel functions. He was able to help suggest ways to build our templates that met our requirements using Excel functions we had not previously considered using. And we have been able to use the Excel information he provided in other ways outside of Vena. He was very patient and flexible as we learned the Vena tool and created templates

Fathom was the cheapest and most basic as an add-on directly to QuickBooks Online Plus, but you lose functionality with Fathom if you use QuickBooks Online Advanced (QBOA). The main loss of functionality for me was the lack of multiple department reporting, which was absolutely necessary for my analysis. Jirav was half the price of Moscaic.tech, but I've heard Mosaic has standard metrics for the SaaS-industry, which is appealing after going through the tedious process of setting up metrics in Jirav. QBOA has additional reporting than QBO Plus, but not enough robust features for planning and modeling. PlaceCPM is Salesforce-based and a I felt having a strong Salesforce admin that can great reports made their unnecessary, and I feel like most of the time you need a Salesforce admin just to run Salesforce. Cube, Vena and OnPlan are spreadsheet-based, but I don't want to use spreadsheets. Prophix, Board and Anaplan seem outdated. Workday was more than what I needed

Vena Solutions stands out due to its familiar Excel-based interface, making it easy for our team to adopt without extensive training. Compared to alternatives like Anaplan and Oracle Hyperion, Vena's strong customer support and efficient automation have significantly reduced our budgeting cycle time. We chose Vena for its seamless integration with our existing systems and substantial time-saving benefits, ultimately enhancing our decision-making process.

Incentivized

Vena solutios is a software that provides robust tools that help different departments in their statistics and we can visualize a lot of promising and visually attractive data. Vena Solutions' level of scalability is high and sustainable over time thanks to the fabulous technical support that is ready to help us at all times

Incentivized

• 1-3 day shortening of post-month end close analysis from integration with our accounting software
• Elimination of several manual Excels related to headcount variance, salary variance, and planning

• Eliminated the necessity to manually combine multiple Excel budget worksheets into one file in order to compile an org-wide budget
• Allows end-users to be self-sufficient by having the ability to drill into transaction-level detail and conduct ad-hoc analyses
• Created more bandwidth in the FP&A team to spend more time on more meaningful analysis

Incentivized