Jirav, headquartered in San Francisco, aims to deliver smarter financials and faster insights, helping to understand where a business has been and predict where it will go. The system joins cloud-based Accounting, HR, CRM and billing data to automatically surface an interconnected model that is unique to a business. The solution helps eradicate spreadsheet errors, produce monthly reports that occur in real-time, and connected data enables teams to collaborate on multiple scenarios – bookings,…
$10,000
per year
Vena
Score 8.6 out of 10
Mid-Size Companies (51-1,000 employees)
Vena Solutions provides a financial process automation solution to automate Corporate Performance Management, accounting and budgeting, Regulatory & Compliance, and other finance-related processes. It is scaled for medium to large-sized organizations.
N/A
Pricing
Jirav
Vena
Editions & Modules
Starter
$10,000
per year
Pro
$15,000
per year
Enterprise
Contact Sales
Professional
N/A
Complete
N/A
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Jirav
Vena
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
The Professional Plan is the most flexible way to get started quickly and can be added onto as a company grows. The plan includes: Vena Platform, Customer Success Manager, Standard Support and Customer Portal.
Complete Plan includes everything in Professional, plus: Vena Insights, Premium Support, Sandbox Environment, and Expert Managed Services.
*Vena offers special pricing for not for profit organizations. To learn more, speak to an expert.
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 …
Vena
Verified User
Contributor
Chose Vena
Vena was the most complete software package with collaboration in mind.
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.
It is well suited for scenarios where a company needs an efficient and scalable solution to implement in their daily products; it eases the work and saves time using Vena. However, I would not recommend this product before analyzing and estimating a budget because it can be pretty expensive for small and medium-sized companies.
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
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 would be great if the templates didn't have to be launched from the download folder for end users. This concept is often confusing for end users and they don't always understand why they can't open the file back up from their downloads folder later on. Might be better if the templates opened in Excel online for end users when a workflow is in play.
The data integration (API) is a bit confusing. All the steps and stages are hard to follow. It would be great if this area could be "dumbed" down a bit further for us non-data people.
Permissions are a bit tedious to set up. We decided to set up permissions using permission user groups instead of task bindings because it would be easier to manage and not accidentally mess up but it still is really tedious because pretty much each person in our organization has to have a separate user group set up for them.
The report books don't seem to work consistently and don't always follow our permission set up so they've not been useful. This is a feature I'd really like to take advantage of but it just isn't quite where I need it to be yet.
The formula (DAX) building feature in Insights is not great. It would be more helpful if it showed you the same tooltips that PBI desktop shows you when you start typing out a formula.
It would be very helpful to be able to drill down on a budget/forecast number and see the LID (line item detail) beneath it and not just the dimension details.
Vena has been a huge win for us as an organization, as it vastly improved our budgeting process by removing manual consolidation that was incredibly time consuming, and it allows us to see a multi-year view of our organizational budget across all of our funding sources. We've seen Vena's platform grow over the years and we've not yet fully adopted some of them so it feels like there's still potential to get even more value out of the platform.
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
Contact with Vena Solutions technical support is quick and experts in the field always respond. It is not necessary to go through a large form to explain the problems and then answer more questions to receive a direct answer, we simply send a message indicating the specific problem and they are immediately there to actively help us
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
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.
The original training was onsite and over two weeks. Since our original onboarding the company has come out with a training website to aid in user self directed needs.
The online training was effective, it would be nice to see a more personalized solution. I understand the training is tailored for all industries, but it would be nice to see industry-specific use cases.
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 has better reporting and budgeting functions than NetSuite Budgeting & Reporting when we compared the two. The Kansas City Chiefs currently use Vena and they had nothing but good things to say about it so that gave us confidence to go with Vena.
We use Vena across 10 countries and 200 users who are located in a wide range of settings and internet reliability. Even with that wide implementation, the most common issue we run into is a new hire not installing the Vena add-in, which is a super quick fix. Depending on our user's location, the internet can sometimes be spotty, but that is outside of Vena's control and even in those settings, Vena might take a little longer to open a template, but it still does open and the user can complete their work. Over 5 years of using Vena, we've collectively only had 3 issues where we needed Vena support to help look at a specific issue a user was having.
Saved considerable time for monthly close by streamlining reporting and entries
Saved considerable time and effort for reconciliations by standardizing input and output and ability to send reviews to different users and track completion
Saved a lot of headache when tracking down variances
