Trintech Financial Reporting and Analytics

Name: Trintech Financial Reporting and Analytics
Brand: Trintech

Leading Provider of AI Financial Close Solutions

Est 1987|Valuation $109.7M|7 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 28K|Website|Web traffic 47K|FTEs 658|HQ Plano, Texas, US

MarketsFinancial Consolidation

Platform CoversAccount Reconciliation Management Reporting

Published Oct 25, 2026

01Common complaints

When the requirement is limited to visualization over an already governed warehouse. Adding close software may duplicate data preparation and governance. Extending existing BI should also be evaluated.
When the organization has a simple, single-entity close with little reconciliation volume. Implementation and administration may outweigh benefits.
When the primary requirement is planning or statutory consolidation. Evaluate purpose-built EPM capabilities; do not assume this reporting page constitutes a complete specification for either.
When collections, credit, disputes, and cash application are required in the same procurement. BlackLine or HighRadius offers a broader relevant portfolio.
When unrestricted infrastructure-log access or custom hosting arrangements are required. Older Trintech documentation describes restrictions; obtain a current written exception before selection.
When guaranteed sub-minute BI refresh is required. The phrase “real-time” should not be treated as a commitment without a measurable service level.
When immediate self-service testing and transparent online pricing are required. The reviewed sales motion is demo-led.
When critical requirements are promised verbally or as future workarounds. Require demonstrated functionality and acceptance milestones before commitment.

These are selection judgments based on product scope, published hosting restrictions, and the failed-implementation account—not claims that Trintech is unsuitable for every smaller or demanding customer.

Buying-process red flags: unspecified module entitlements; undefined latency; non-cancellable commitments without acceptance criteria; unclear integration ownership; and refusal to demonstrate required reports using representative data. Actual contract terms must be inspected rather than presumed.

Issue	Evidence status	Buyer implication
Reporting and dashboard flexibility	Recurring review theme	Build required reports during evaluation.
Source-format rigidity	Gartner customer report	Test rejection handling, changed schemas, and reconciliation completeness.
Portfolio differences	Distinct Adra, Cadency, and legacy offerings	Obtain a product-by-product capability and entitlement matrix.
API maintenance	Adra portal lists September 2026 changes marked “Breaking”	Budget connector regression testing and version management.
API throughput limits	No universal rate, pagination, or payload guarantees established	Request endpoint-specific limits and extraction benchmarks.
Maximum scale	No independently validated breaking point established	Test peak loads, history, concurrency, and refresh windows.
Security evidence scope	Detailed current audit reports not fully evaluated	Review reports under NDA and confirm module coverage.
Roadmap and AI maturity	Recent announcements; limited independent outcome evidence	Separate announced, generally available, licensed, and proven capabilities.

Evidence spans reviews, product material, and current developer documentation; it does not establish that every limitation affects every deployment.

Trintech unveiled Data Access, Accruals Intelligence, and Exception Management agents on September 28, 2026. The announcement does not establish rollout dates, pricing, or availability in every Adra, Cadency, or legacy environment. No dependable public roadmap date for resolving the specific reporting complaints was found.

- **When the requirement is limited to visualization over an already governed warehouse.** Adding close software may duplicate data preparation and governance. Extending existing BI should also be evaluated. - **When the organization has a simple, single-entity close with little reconciliation volume.** Implementation and administration may outweigh benefits. - **When the primary requirement is planning or statutory consolidation.** Evaluate purpose-built EPM capabilities; do not assume this reporting page constitutes a complete specification for either. - **When collections, credit, disputes, and cash application are required in the same procurement.** BlackLine or HighRadius offers a broader relevant portfolio. - **When unrestricted infrastructure-log access or custom hosting arrangements are required.** Older Trintech documentation describes restrictions; obtain a current written exception before selection. - **When guaranteed sub-minute BI refresh is required.** The phrase “real-time” should not be treated as a commitment without a measurable service level. - **When immediate self-service testing and transparent online pricing are required.** The reviewed sales motion is demo-led. - **When critical requirements are promised verbally or as future workarounds.** Require demonstrated functionality and acceptance milestones before commitment. These are selection judgments based on product scope, published hosting restrictions, and the failed-implementation account—not claims that Trintech is unsuitable for every smaller or demanding customer. **Buying-process red flags:** unspecified module entitlements; undefined latency; non-cancellable commitments without acceptance criteria; unclear integration ownership; and refusal to demonstrate required reports using representative data. Actual contract terms must be inspected rather than presumed. | Issue | Evidence status | Buyer implication | |---|---|---| | Reporting and dashboard flexibility | Recurring review theme | Build required reports during evaluation. | | Source-format rigidity | Gartner customer report | Test rejection handling, changed schemas, and reconciliation completeness. | | Portfolio differences | Distinct Adra, Cadency, and legacy offerings | Obtain a product-by-product capability and entitlement matrix. | | API maintenance | Adra portal lists September 2026 changes marked “Breaking” | Budget connector regression testing and version management. | | API throughput limits | No universal rate, pagination, or payload guarantees established | Request endpoint-specific limits and extraction benchmarks. | | Maximum scale | No independently validated breaking point established | Test peak loads, history, concurrency, and refresh windows. | | Security evidence scope | Detailed current audit reports not fully evaluated | Review reports under NDA and confirm module coverage. | | Roadmap and AI maturity | Recent announcements; limited independent outcome evidence | Separate announced, generally available, licensed, and proven capabilities. | Evidence spans reviews, product material, and current developer documentation; it does not establish that every limitation affects every deployment. Trintech unveiled Data Access, Accruals Intelligence, and Exception Management agents on **September 28, 2026**. The announcement does not establish rollout dates, pricing, or availability in every Adra, Cadency, or legacy environment. No dependable public roadmap date for resolving the specific reporting complaints was found.

Overall assessment

Trintech is a candidate for shortlisting when reporting improvements are closely connected to reconciliation, close controls, and operational finance data. The available evidence most directly supports visibility, standardization, and reduced manual reconciliation work. The principal risks are report flexibility, integration configuration, implementation execution, and assuming that portfolio-wide AI claims are included in the proposed subscription.

A scoped proof of value is advisable: demonstrate required reports, reconcile outputs to source systems, measure refresh latency under peak load, and make acceptance criteria contractual. This approach provides more decision-useful evidence than aggregate ratings or vendor comparison claims alone.

**Trintech is a candidate for shortlisting when reporting improvements are closely connected to reconciliation, close controls, and operational finance data.** The available evidence most directly supports visibility, standardization, and reduced manual reconciliation work. The principal risks are report flexibility, integration configuration, implementation execution, and assuming that portfolio-wide AI claims are included in the proposed subscription. A scoped proof of value is advisable: demonstrate required reports, reconcile outputs to source systems, measure refresh latency under peak load, and make acceptance criteria contractual. This approach provides more decision-useful evidence than aggregate ratings or vendor comparison claims alone.

02Why they buy

Reconciliation-context analytics: reports can draw on statuses, exceptions, approvals, and control evidence—not merely ledger balances. RaceTrac provides a concrete example of the operational value.
External BI flexibility: Trintech explicitly supports supplying data to Power BI and Tableau, while Adra material describes configurable Power BI templates. This can preserve an organization’s visualization investments.
Finance-specific trend analysis: Adra Analytics combines reconciliation/task information and historical trends with other financial data.
Continuity through ERP change: RaceTrac’s historical-data access during its Workday transition is a specific vendor-published example.

What is not proven unique: dashboards, AI variance analysis, audit trails, ERP integration, and close reporting are also offered by competitors. Trintech’s differentiation depends on the fit and depth of its reconciliation workflows, not exclusive ownership of those feature categories.

- **Reconciliation-context analytics:** reports can draw on statuses, exceptions, approvals, and control evidence—not merely ledger balances. RaceTrac provides a concrete example of the operational value. - **External BI flexibility:** Trintech explicitly supports supplying data to Power BI and Tableau, while Adra material describes configurable Power BI templates. This can preserve an organization’s visualization investments. - **Finance-specific trend analysis:** Adra Analytics combines reconciliation/task information and historical trends with other financial data. - **Continuity through ERP change:** RaceTrac’s historical-data access during its Workday transition is a specific vendor-published example. **What is not proven unique:** dashboards, AI variance analysis, audit trails, ERP integration, and close reporting are also offered by competitors. Trintech’s differentiation depends on the fit and depth of its reconciliation workflows, not exclusive ownership of those feature categories.

03Field reports

Evidence quality and review coverage

Platform	Retrieved evidence	Interpretation
G2	High aggregated rating on G2; seller page showed several hundred reviews.	Broad portfolio sentiment, not a reporting-only evaluation.
Gartner Peer Insights	Generally favorable rating on Gartner Peer Insights with over a hundred ratings; distribution skewed toward four- and five-star ratings with very few low ratings.	Mostly favorable, with very few low ratings.
TrustRadius	High score on TrustRadius based on a small number of reviews.	Small sample; individual review text did not render in the retrieved page.
Reddit	Relevant comparison and performance discussions found.	Anonymous and unverified; useful for identifying diligence questions.
Hacker News	Search found recruiting material, not substantive product reviews.	No credible customer quotation available.

The G2 and Gartner listings aggregate products and generations. Their ratings should not be treated as direct validation of the current reporting page’s AI and real-time claims.

| Platform | Retrieved evidence | Interpretation | |---|---|---| | G2 | High aggregated rating on G2; seller page showed several hundred reviews. | Broad portfolio sentiment, not a reporting-only evaluation. | | Gartner Peer Insights | Generally favorable rating on Gartner Peer Insights with over a hundred ratings; distribution skewed toward four- and five-star ratings with very few low ratings. | Mostly favorable, with very few low ratings. | | TrustRadius | High score on TrustRadius based on a small number of reviews. | Small sample; individual review text did not render in the retrieved page. | | Reddit | Relevant comparison and performance discussions found. | Anonymous and unverified; useful for identifying diligence questions. | | Hacker News | Search found recruiting material, not substantive product reviews. | No credible customer quotation available. | The G2 and Gartner listings aggregate products and generations. Their ratings should not be treated as direct validation of the current reporting page’s AI and real-time claims.

Favorable and critical customer evidence

Perspective	Attributed evidence	Qualification
Positive G2	Bank reconciliation associate, highly positive G2 review: “I like that Trintech is very user-friendly.”	Seller-invited, incentivized, AI-translated review.
Severe negative G2	Finance director, very negative G2 review: “We ultimately had to abandon the implementation”	Excerpt; review alleges missing promised Adra functionality and unsuccessful workarounds.

These are contrasting experiences, not evidence that either outcome is typical. The severe negative review is a very low-rated submission rather than an obviously fabricated mid-range rating.

Positive Gartner: a very positive Gartner reviewer praised “The representatives and support provided.”
Critical Gartner: a middling Gartner reviewer wrote, “The user interface is not friendly.” The same review described rigid source-data requirements but praised assistance with difficult configurations. A directly accessible two-star narrative was not obtained.

A Reddit discussion concerning an existing Cadency installation stated:

Cadency by Trintech is the existing software but business complains of performance and stability issues.

The participant said BlackLine was being considered. This establishes reported dissatisfaction and evaluation intent—not a verified migration or diagnosed platform defect.

TrustRadius’s accessible summary highlights compliance notifications, usability, and reliability. Because individual narratives were unavailable, no quotation is presented as a direct TrustRadius customer statement.

| Perspective | Attributed evidence | Qualification | |---|---|---| | Positive G2 | Bank reconciliation associate, highly positive G2 review: “I like that Trintech is very user-friendly.” | Seller-invited, incentivized, AI-translated review. | | Severe negative G2 | Finance director, very negative G2 review: “We ultimately had to abandon the implementation” | Excerpt; review alleges missing promised Adra functionality and unsuccessful workarounds. | These are contrasting experiences, not evidence that either outcome is typical. The severe negative review is a very low-rated submission rather than an obviously fabricated mid-range rating. - **Positive Gartner:** a very positive Gartner reviewer praised “The representatives and support provided.” - **Critical Gartner:** a middling Gartner reviewer wrote, “The user interface is not friendly.” The same review described rigid source-data requirements but praised assistance with difficult configurations. A directly accessible two-star narrative was not obtained. A Reddit discussion concerning an existing Cadency installation stated: > Cadency by Trintech is the existing software but business complains of performance and stability issues. The participant said BlackLine was being considered. This establishes reported dissatisfaction and evaluation intent—not a verified migration or diagnosed platform defect. TrustRadius’s accessible summary highlights compliance notifications, usability, and reliability. Because individual narratives were unavailable, no quotation is presented as a direct TrustRadius customer statement.

Why customers choose, reject, or leave

Choose: centralized reconciliation evidence, multi-entity visibility, standardized approvals, and less manual work. RaceTrac’s named customer story describes these requirements concretely.
Reject or abandon: the severe G2 case illustrates the risk of functionality gaps emerging after contracting.
Consider switching: the Reddit discussion identifies performance and stability concerns.
Documented competitor-selected churn example: BlackLine publishes a LAZ Parking testimonial about outgrowing Trintech T-Recs. It concerns a different Trintech product and is competitor-curated—not evidence that current Cadency reporting has the same limitation.

- **Choose:** centralized reconciliation evidence, multi-entity visibility, standardized approvals, and less manual work. RaceTrac’s named customer story describes these requirements concretely. - **Reject or abandon:** the severe G2 case illustrates the risk of functionality gaps emerging after contracting. - **Consider switching:** the Reddit discussion identifies performance and stability concerns. - **Documented competitor-selected churn example:** BlackLine publishes a LAZ Parking testimonial about outgrowing Trintech T-Recs. It concerns a different Trintech product and is competitor-curated—not evidence that current Cadency reporting has the same limitation.

Siemens: shared-services reporting and standardization

Problem: fragmented regional processes, insufficient transparency, and a need for stronger reconciliation controls.
Implementation: selected Cadency Certification as part of shared-services standardization, with dashboards and rules-based account risk treatment.
Reported result: a meaningful reduction in overall cost to deliver.
Critical qualification: vendor-published customer account; baseline cost components, measurement period, implementation expenditure, and causal attribution are not disclosed. The result is broader than analytics alone. The reporting page also presents complete reconciliation coverage, while the detailed case introduces complete coverage as a project requirement; buyers should request the underlying measurement.

- **Problem:** fragmented regional processes, insufficient transparency, and a need for stronger reconciliation controls. - **Implementation:** selected Cadency Certification as part of shared-services standardization, with dashboards and rules-based account risk treatment. - **Reported result:** a meaningful reduction in overall cost to deliver. - **Critical qualification:** vendor-published customer account; baseline cost components, measurement period, implementation expenditure, and causal attribution are not disclosed. The result is broader than analytics alone. The reporting page also presents complete reconciliation coverage, while the detailed case introduces complete coverage as a project requirement; buyers should request the underlying measurement.

Northern Tool: daily reconciliation visibility

Problem: transaction-matching volume and manual daily reconciliation work.
Reported result: substantially less time on daily reconciliations, clearer exception reporting, and a shortened close by several days over an extended implementation period.
Critical qualification: these figures come from the supplied vendor page and linked testimonial. Staffing, transaction growth, implementation costs, and the analytics-specific contribution are not disclosed. They do not establish typical early ROI.

- **Problem:** transaction-matching volume and manual daily reconciliation work. - **Reported result:** substantially less time on daily reconciliations, clearer exception reporting, and a shortened close by several days over an extended implementation period. - **Critical qualification:** these figures come from the supplied vendor page and linked testimonial. Staffing, transaction growth, implementation costs, and the analytics-specific contribution are not disclosed. They do not establish typical early ROI.

RaceTrac: phased adoption and ERP migration

Starting point: printed Excel support, notebooks, verbal status updates, and incomplete reconciliation visibility.
Implementation: phased Cadency adoption across accounting, finance, and tax, with onsite assistance; later maintained reconciliation access through a Workday migration and changed GL structure.
Reported outcomes: daily status visibility, complete reconciliation coverage, direct auditor access, and earlier correction of inconsistencies.
Adoption lesson: involve end users and phase organizational change.
Critical qualification: the vendor account provides workflow detail but no quantified audit hours, implementation duration, or independently calculated ROI. Coverage is not equivalent to complete automation or error-free accounts.

- **Starting point:** printed Excel support, notebooks, verbal status updates, and incomplete reconciliation visibility. - **Implementation:** phased Cadency adoption across accounting, finance, and tax, with onsite assistance; later maintained reconciliation access through a Workday migration and changed GL structure. - **Reported outcomes:** daily status visibility, complete reconciliation coverage, direct auditor access, and earlier correction of inconsistencies. - **Adoption lesson:** involve end users and phase organizational change. - **Critical qualification:** the vendor account provides workflow detail but no quantified audit hours, implementation duration, or independently calculated ROI. Coverage is not equivalent to complete automation or error-free accounts.

Dallas Cowboys: an explicitly identified analytics deployment

Scope: vendor case material explicitly names Adra Analytics alongside Matcher, Balancer, and Task Manager, rather than merely displaying a customer logo.
Context: the historical case describes several hundred employees and many legal entities, illustrating that entity complexity matters more than employee count alone.
Time to value: a vendor follow-up reports benefits early in deployment and integration with Microsoft Dynamics 365.
Critical qualification: benefits across the suite cannot be attributed solely to Analytics; a quantified, independently verified analytics ROI was not supplied.

- **Scope:** vendor case material explicitly names Adra Analytics alongside Matcher, Balancer, and Task Manager, rather than merely displaying a customer logo. - **Context:** the historical case describes several hundred employees and many legal entities, illustrating that entity complexity matters more than employee count alone. - **Time to value:** a vendor follow-up reports benefits early in deployment and integration with Microsoft Dynamics 365. - **Critical qualification:** benefits across the suite cannot be attributed solely to Analytics; a quantified, independently verified analytics ROI was not supplied.

Mixed outcome: abandoned Adra implementation

A finance director’s G2 account alleges unsupported promised functionality, an extended period of unsuccessful partner workarounds, and abandonment.
No independent project record or vendor response was available; it remains an important but isolated allegation.

04Best fit

The following ranges are analyst qualification heuristics, not published vendor eligibility thresholds.

Segment	Indicative size	Why it may fit
Adra-oriented buyer	Mid-market organizations with multiple business units and moderate revenue	Multiple entities, recurring close coordination problems, and meaningful reconciliation effort.
Cadency-oriented buyer	Large enterprises with extensive operations and higher revenue	Shared services, heterogeneous systems, complex controls, and high-volume reconciliation.
Complexity-led exception	Modest headcount but numerous entities or very high transaction volume	Financial-process complexity can justify the investment despite modest workforce size.

The following ranges are **analyst qualification heuristics**, not published vendor eligibility thresholds. | Segment | Indicative size | Why it may fit | |---|---|---| | Adra-oriented buyer | Mid-market organizations with multiple business units and moderate revenue | Multiple entities, recurring close coordination problems, and meaningful reconciliation effort. | | Cadency-oriented buyer | Large enterprises with extensive operations and higher revenue | Shared services, heterogeneous systems, complex controls, and high-volume reconciliation. | | Complexity-led exception | Modest headcount but numerous entities or very high transaction volume | Financial-process complexity can justify the investment despite modest workforce size. |

Potential fit characteristics

Existing or planned Trintech reconciliation workflows whose data needs to reach executives or BI users.
Multiple entities or ERPs and inconsistent definitions of completion, exceptions, and account risk.
Manual status collection, audit-evidence assembly, and reconciliation-aging reporting.
An accountable finance process owner and IT/BI capacity to validate data pipelines.
Willingness to standardize mappings and controls before automating reporting.

These characteristics follow from the product architecture and detailed customer examples, rather than verified conversion-rate analysis.

- Existing or planned Trintech reconciliation workflows whose data needs to reach executives or BI users. - Multiple entities or ERPs and inconsistent definitions of completion, exceptions, and account risk. - Manual status collection, audit-evidence assembly, and reconciliation-aging reporting. - An accountable finance process owner and IT/BI capacity to validate data pipelines. - Willingness to standardize mappings and controls before automating reporting. These characteristics follow from the product architecture and detailed customer examples, rather than verified conversion-rate analysis.

Industries and personas

Retail and convenience: Northern Tool and RaceTrac illustrate transaction matching, exceptions, and daily control visibility.
Manufacturing/shared services: Siemens illustrates standardization and enterprise oversight.
Diversified organizations: the Dallas Cowboys case explicitly identifies analytics within a multi-company environment.
Decision makers: CFO, chief accounting officer, controller, shared-services leader, and finance-transformation sponsor.
Technical approvers: CIO/IT integration, security, identity, data governance, and BI teams.
End users: accountants, preparers, reviewers, accounting managers, FP&A analysts, and auditors. Customer examples remain vendor-published unless otherwise stated.

- **Retail and convenience:** Northern Tool and RaceTrac illustrate transaction matching, exceptions, and daily control visibility. - **Manufacturing/shared services:** Siemens illustrates standardization and enterprise oversight. - **Diversified organizations:** the Dallas Cowboys case explicitly identifies analytics within a multi-company environment. - **Decision makers:** CFO, chief accounting officer, controller, shared-services leader, and finance-transformation sponsor. - **Technical approvers:** CIO/IT integration, security, identity, data governance, and BI teams. - **End users:** accountants, preparers, reviewers, accounting managers, FP&A analysts, and auditors. Customer examples remain vendor-published unless otherwise stated.

| Adra-oriented buyer | Mid-market organizations with multiple business units and moderate revenue | Multiple entities, recurring close coordination problems, and meaningful reconc…

Key Differentiator

05The pitch

What the product does

The supplied product page describes four principal applications:

Matching and exception analysis.
Variance and flux analysis across periods, entities, and forecasts.
Close-progress monitoring and bottleneck identification.
Compliance, control-evidence, and audit-readiness reporting.

Important buying distinction: the page describes a capability across Trintech’s portfolio, not a transparently priced, standalone BI subscription. Buyers must establish which underlying product, modules, APIs, and services deliver each function. Adra Analytics is a separately identifiable offering that synchronizes with other Adra modules; Cadency also provides reporting within enterprise close workflows.

Trintech Financial Reporting and Analytics is a financial-close intelligence capability: it provides reporting on reconciliations, exceptions, journals, controls, and close progress, and supplies governed financial data to external business intelligence tools. The vendor describes it as **AI Financial Reporting, Analytics & Intelligence Software**, with connections to Power BI, Tableau, and other analytics environments. The supplied product page describes four principal applications: - Matching and exception analysis. - Variance and flux analysis across periods, entities, and forecasts. - Close-progress monitoring and bottleneck identification. - Compliance, control-evidence, and audit-readiness reporting. **Important buying distinction:** the page describes a capability across Trintech’s portfolio, not a transparently priced, standalone BI subscription. Buyers must establish which underlying product, modules, APIs, and services deliver each function. Adra Analytics is a separately identifiable offering that synchronizes with other Adra modules; Cadency also provides reporting within enterprise close workflows.

Target market and positioning

Adra: small and midsize organizations seeking more structured reconciliation and close processes.
Cadency: large enterprises with complex entities, substantial transaction volumes, and demanding control requirements.
Reporting stakeholders: accountants, preparers, reviewers, controllers, shared-services leaders, FP&A, executives, and auditors.
Positioning: an operational finance intelligence layer connected to the close, with reports that may incorporate reconciliation status, approval history, and control context.

- **Adra:** small and midsize organizations seeking more structured reconciliation and close processes. - **Cadency:** large enterprises with complex entities, substantial transaction volumes, and demanding control requirements. - **Reporting stakeholders:** accountants, preparers, reviewers, controllers, shared-services leaders, FP&A, executives, and auditors. - **Positioning:** an operational finance intelligence layer connected to the close, with reports that may incorporate reconciliation status, approval history, and control context.

Get a comprehensive analysis of Trintech Financial Reporting and Analytics including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →

Trintech Financial Reporting and Analytics

01Common complaints

Overall assessment

02Why they buy

03Field reports

Evidence quality and review coverage

Favorable and critical customer evidence

Why customers choose, reject, or leave

Siemens: shared-services reporting and standardization

Northern Tool: daily reconciliation visibility

RaceTrac: phased adoption and ERP migration

Dallas Cowboys: an explicitly identified analytics deployment

Mixed outcome: abandoned Adra implementation

04Best fit

Potential fit characteristics

Industries and personas

05The pitch

What the product does

Target market and positioning

How it compares

01Common complaints

Overall assessment

02Why they buy

03Field reports

Evidence quality and review coverage

Favorable and critical customer evidence

Why customers choose, reject, or leave

Siemens: shared-services reporting and standardization

Northern Tool: daily reconciliation visibility

RaceTrac: phased adoption and ERP migration

Dallas Cowboys: an explicitly identified analytics deployment

Mixed outcome: abandoned Adra implementation

04Best fit

Potential fit characteristics

Industries and personas

05The pitch

What the product does

Target market and positioning

How it compares