SAP Concur

Name: SAP Concur
Brand: SAP
Rating: 4.1 (9918 reviews)

Leader

We bring out the best in every business.

Est 1972|Valuation $278.5B|Raised $495.9M|155 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 180K|Website|Web traffic 12.5M|FTEs 2,432|HQ Walldorf, Germany

MarketsExpense Management Invoice Data Capture & Processing

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where SAP Concur tends to excel - Large enterprise governance: approvals, audit trails, policy controls - Global travel/expense programs with multi-currency and compliance needs - Integration ecosystem via partners and APIs (vendor claims a broad connector set) Where competitors can be stronger - Navan: positioned around a more modern booking experience and simpler user workflows; offers accessible entry pricing for smaller companies. - Emburse Spend: clearer, predictable per-user pricing and an SMB-first design. - Ramp: frequently adopted where corporate card + expense automation is the center of the workflow, with a model that monetizes card economics. Independent/press signals on the market - Navan has received notable business press coverage, illustrating market activity and competitive intensity in travel/expense. Important caution: SAP Concur’s own “vs” pages are competitor-perspective content and should not be treated as independent benchmarking.

	SAP Concur	Navan	Emburse Spend
Starting Price	Published entry per-report pricing for some Expense modules; broader platform pricing is quote-based	Entry pricing available for travel and expense with free/low-cost entry options for smaller teams; enterprise pricing is quoted	Per-user subscription tiers (vendor-published per-user model)
Recommended for	Mid-market to global enterprise needing policy rigor, auditability, and ERP ecosystem	SMB to mid-market (and enterprise plans available) wanting modern UX and integrated travel+expense	SMBs and smaller teams wanting predictable per-user pricing
Key Strength	Mature controls, global readiness, deep ecosystem, strong policy/approval structures	Transparent entry pricing, strong travel inventory and consumer-grade UX emphasis	Clear pricing, lightweight deployment, good fit for smaller teams
Key Weakness	Usability complaints, complexity, performance complaints; enterprise quote-based costs can be opaque	Free-tier constraints and enterprise pricing not fully public; may not fit highly complex global policies	May not meet complex multinational enterprise requirements (language/regions/complex approvals)

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where SAP Concur tends to excel

Large enterprise governance: approvals, audit trails, policy controls
Global travel/expense programs with multi-currency and compliance needs
Integration ecosystem via partners and APIs (vendor claims a broad connector set)

Where competitors can be stronger

Navan: positioned around a more modern booking experience and simpler user workflows; offers accessible entry pricing for smaller companies.
Emburse Spend: clearer, predictable per-user pricing and an SMB-first design.
Ramp: frequently adopted where corporate card + expense automation is the center of the workflow, with a model that monetizes card economics.

Independent/press signals on the market

Navan has received notable business press coverage, illustrating market activity and competitive intensity in travel/expense.

Important caution: SAP Concur’s own “vs” pages are competitor-perspective content and should not be treated as independent benchmarking.

	SAP Concur	Navan	Emburse Spend
Starting Price	Published entry per-report pricing for some Expense modules; broader platform pricing is quote-based	Entry pricing available for travel and expense with free/low-cost entry options for smaller teams; enterprise pricing is quoted	Per-user subscription tiers (vendor-published per-user model)
Recommended for	Mid-market to global enterprise needing policy rigor, auditability, and ERP ecosystem	SMB to mid-market (and enterprise plans available) wanting modern UX and integrated travel+expense	SMBs and smaller teams wanting predictable per-user pricing
Key Strength	Mature controls, global readiness, deep ecosystem, strong policy/approval structures	Transparent entry pricing, strong travel inventory and consumer-grade UX emphasis	Clear pricing, lightweight deployment, good fit for smaller teams
Key Weakness	Usability complaints, complexity, performance complaints; enterprise quote-based costs can be opaque	Free-tier constraints and enterprise pricing not fully public; may not fit highly complex global policies	May not meet complex multinational enterprise requirements (language/regions/complex approvals)