Lavante

Name: Lavante
Brand: Lavante

Voted "Top Corporate Culture" from 2008 through 2016!

Est 2001|Valuation $8.3M|Raised $27.1M|7 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 539|Website|FTEs 51|HQ San Jose, California, US

MarketsSource-to-Pay Supplier Relationship Management (SRM) and Vendor Management (VRM)

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- SAP Ariba: Often selected by SAP-centric enterprises for network effects, catalog/PO/invoicing workflows, and integration with SAP ERP. Pricing is generally quote-based and can involve supplier transaction fees depending on usage. - Coupa: A widely adopted spend management suite; supplier portal has published supplier-side pricing tiers that can inform supplier enablement cost estimates, although buyer licensing differs. - JAGGAER and other suite competitors: Emphasize broad source-to-pay capabilities; pricing is typically provided on a quote basis. - Specialists (HICX, Opus/Hiperos, riskmethods): Often selected when buyers require deeper supplier master data governance or specialized risk capabilities.

Evidence of adoption trends / market activity

PRGX communications indicate migration and consolidation activity, with some Lavante portal functionality integrated into or rebranded as PRGX Supplier Connect. This suggests that parts of Lavante’s technology or customer base are being incorporated into PRGX’s broader offering.

	Lavante	SAP Ariba (Buyer + Network)	Coupa (Supplier Portal/Network)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (quote-based)	Price upon request for buyer licenses and modules	Supplier-side plans publicly listed (supplier-side pricing differs from buyer licensing)
Typical Fit	Enterprises focused on supplier data quality, onboarding/compliance, with a historical alignment to recovery audit activities	Large enterprises standardizing on the SAP ecosystem with a need for network effects and deep ERP integration	Organizations seeking a modern spend/procurement suite with a large supplier ecosystem and supplier self-service capabilities
Key Strength	Supplier information management and supplier engagement/data quality positioning; historical linkage to recovery audit functions	Broad suite integration, extensive network, and deep enterprise functionality	Usability reputation and clear supplier-side packaging in public materials; broad suite capabilities
Key Weakness	Limited public information on security and pricing; fewer public end-user reviews; migration risk under parent company portfolio changes	Complexity and potentially long implementations; network fee considerations for suppliers	Buyer licensing typically enterprise and may require significant change management

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

SAP Ariba: Often selected by SAP-centric enterprises for network effects, catalog/PO/invoicing workflows, and integration with SAP ERP. Pricing is generally quote-based and can involve supplier transaction fees depending on usage.
Coupa: A widely adopted spend management suite; supplier portal has published supplier-side pricing tiers that can inform supplier enablement cost estimates, although buyer licensing differs.
JAGGAER and other suite competitors: Emphasize broad source-to-pay capabilities; pricing is typically provided on a quote basis.
Specialists (HICX, Opus/Hiperos, riskmethods): Often selected when buyers require deeper supplier master data governance or specialized risk capabilities.

Evidence of adoption trends / market activity

	Lavante	SAP Ariba (Buyer + Network)	Coupa (Supplier Portal/Network)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (quote-based)	Price upon request for buyer licenses and modules	Supplier-side plans publicly listed (supplier-side pricing differs from buyer licensing)
Typical Fit	Enterprises focused on supplier data quality, onboarding/compliance, with a historical alignment to recovery audit activities	Large enterprises standardizing on the SAP ecosystem with a need for network effects and deep ERP integration	Organizations seeking a modern spend/procurement suite with a large supplier ecosystem and supplier self-service capabilities
Key Strength	Supplier information management and supplier engagement/data quality positioning; historical linkage to recovery audit functions	Broad suite integration, extensive network, and deep enterprise functionality	Usability reputation and clear supplier-side packaging in public materials; broad suite capabilities
Key Weakness	Limited public information on security and pricing; fewer public end-user reviews; migration risk under parent company portfolio changes	Complexity and potentially long implementations; network fee considerations for suppliers	Buyer licensing typically enterprise and may require significant change management