Grow

Name: Grow
Brand: Grow

Grow makes it simple for companies to connect their data and surface insights so everyone can make data-driven decisions

Est 2014|Valuation $56.5M|Raised $28.2M|21 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 5K|Web traffic 7K|FTEs 46|HQ Lehi, Utah, US

MarketsData Visualization

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis: market position

- Versus Power BI: Power BI provides extensive modeling and governance features suitable for enterprise analytics programs, but often requires greater technical investment and per-user licensing. Some organizations migrate away from Power BI if they require faster, lower-maintenance dashboards for non-technical users. - Versus Klipfolio: Klipfolio provides transparent pricing and straightforward KPI dashboarding; Grow emphasizes integrated storage/transforms and onboarding support, which may be advantageous for teams that prefer vendor-led implementation. - Versus Phocas: Epicor has historically offered analytics via partner options and positions Grow as a business-user focused BI option alongside other analytics offerings. Feature comparisons vary by reviewer mix.

Adoption / market signals

Listings and reviews on major review platforms indicate adoption in SMB and mid-market reporting use cases. Epicor’s continued inclusion of Grow in its product portfolio suggests ongoing product support and investment.

	Grow (grow.com)	Microsoft Power BI	Klipfolio
Starting Price	Reported starting in the low-thousands per month (varies by contract)	Per-user pricing at a low monthly per-seat rate	Base plans in the hundreds per month (annual billing typical)
Typical Use Case	Mid-market teams seeking an integrated connect/prepare/visualize platform with vendor onboarding support	Organizations within the Microsoft ecosystem needing advanced modeling and governance	KPI dashboards and client reporting with transparent self-serve pricing
Key Strength	Integrated approach combining connectors, dataset transforms, storage, and dashboards; vendor-provided onboarding/support reported by many users	Deep ecosystem integration, semantic modeling, governance features, large talent pool	Transparent pricing and self-serve model; strong dashboarding features for straightforward KPI reporting
Key Weakness	Reported performance and some feature gaps; limited public pricing transparency	Per-user licensing can scale cost; steeper learning curve for advanced modeling	Dashboard limits per plan and possible need for add-ons for enterprise use

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis: market position

Versus Power BI: Power BI provides extensive modeling and governance features suitable for enterprise analytics programs, but often requires greater technical investment and per-user licensing. Some organizations migrate away from Power BI if they require faster, lower-maintenance dashboards for non-technical users.
Versus Klipfolio: Klipfolio provides transparent pricing and straightforward KPI dashboarding; Grow emphasizes integrated storage/transforms and onboarding support, which may be advantageous for teams that prefer vendor-led implementation.
Versus Phocas: Epicor has historically offered analytics via partner options and positions Grow as a business-user focused BI option alongside other analytics offerings. Feature comparisons vary by reviewer mix.

Adoption / market signals

	Grow (grow.com)	Microsoft Power BI	Klipfolio
Starting Price	Reported starting in the low-thousands per month (varies by contract)	Per-user pricing at a low monthly per-seat rate	Base plans in the hundreds per month (annual billing typical)
Typical Use Case	Mid-market teams seeking an integrated connect/prepare/visualize platform with vendor onboarding support	Organizations within the Microsoft ecosystem needing advanced modeling and governance	KPI dashboards and client reporting with transparent self-serve pricing
Key Strength	Integrated approach combining connectors, dataset transforms, storage, and dashboards; vendor-provided onboarding/support reported by many users	Deep ecosystem integration, semantic modeling, governance features, large talent pool	Transparent pricing and self-serve model; strong dashboarding features for straightforward KPI reporting
Key Weakness	Reported performance and some feature gaps; limited public pricing transparency	Per-user licensing can scale cost; steeper learning curve for advanced modeling	Dashboard limits per plan and possible need for add-ons for enterprise use