Xactly Commission Expense Accounting Reviews and Ratings

Rating: 7.6 out of 10

Score

7.6 out of 10

Reviews

3 Reviews

CEA makes ASC606 compliance easy

Rating: 8 out of 10

Incentivized

February 26, 2020

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

Xactly CEA is allowing us to be in compliance with ASC606 without having an additional person calculating commissions and maintaining a massive spreadsheet.

Pros

Amortization & capitalization.
Follow set rules defining when/how certain payments are expensed.

Cons

Formatting of some reports in Excel isn't ideal when exported.
Expense rules are on the back end which requires asking support to update (although these are handled quickly).

Likelihood to Recommend

CEA is well suited for small and rapidly growing companies where manually calculating commissions expense for ASC606 is not an option due to a lack of internal resources. CEA is less appropriate for larger companies that have the resources and likely a person, or people, who only focus on commissions.

Verified User

Administrator in Finance and Accounting (201-500 employees)

Vetted Review

1 year of experience

Obero CEA User

Rating: 6 out of 10

Incentivized

June 13, 2019

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

The accounting department owns CEA. We have both a 605 and a 606 instance, with different rules set up in each instance according to our policies under the different standards. Our financials for the year ended January 31, 2019. That was the first year we were live with 606, so now we use the 606 instances exclusively. CEA provides us with automated amortization waterfalls and journal entries. In a perfect state, we would be able to download the journal entries and upload directly to NetSuite. However, due to the state our ICM system where commissions are not calculated accurately or timely, this is not possible. In addition, we are a publicly traded company and the system is not in compliance with our ITGCs, so there is a lot of additional manual checks that I must perform before booking entries.

Pros

Amortization waterfalls
Locked periods & PPA adjustments
Journal entries

Cons

Not possible to make back-end changes to amortization schedules independently (for example, if departments need to be changed).
Impossible to change rules without customer support, for example, if a new plan is added.
Have to run separate amortization schedules for each subsidiary rather than at a consolidated level.

Likelihood to Recommend

Well suited if the company has an ICM solution that can produce accurate data on a timely basis. Not well suited for companies where commission calculations are not automated. Not well suited for companies with frequent plan changes.

Verified User

Manager in Finance and Accounting (1001-5000 employees)

Vetted Review

1 year of experience

Obero SPM Review

Rating: 9 out of 10

Incentivized

October 20, 2017

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

Obero SPM is being used across the enterprise in finance to aggregate financial data and run models. The reports and templates are used by various business groups and can be accessed across functions to view data. The problems it addresses are instead of working on manual spreadsheets, the models calculate the required information and push it to separate models.

Pros

User-Friendly
Fast
Support

Cons

Dashboard is on a different page
Needing to rerun reports
Not being able to download reports and edit them

Likelihood to Recommend

Forecasting and reporting capabilities are very user-friendly. The interface is good for cross-business functionality!

Verified User

Analyst in Finance and Accounting (10,001+ employees)

Vetted Review

1 year of experience

Loading Reviews List....