G2Grid ReportP2PSpring2022

Grid® Report for Procure to Pay
Spring 2022
Procure to Pay Software

Contenders Leaders
Market Presence
Niche High Performers
Satisfaction
G2 Grid® Scoring
(Procure to Pay Software continues on next page)
© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form without G2’s prior written
permission. While the information in this report has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, G2 disclaims all warranties as to the
accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of such information and shall have no liability for errors, omissions, or inadequacies in such information.
1
Grid® Report for Procure to Pay | Spring 2022
Procure to Pay Software (continued)

Procure to Pay Software Definition
Procure to pay software manages all procurement activities, from purchasing to vendor payments. This type of software helps companies
streamline procurement operations and increase efficiency by using one centralized system instead of separate solutions. Procure to pay
solutions are mostly used by procurement professionals but can also be leveraged by accountants to monitor invoices and payments. Suppliers
may also use procure to pay software through online portals.
Procure to pay software is usually delivered as a mix of multiple solutions or as a standalone software suite. When not included in the product,
procure to pay software needs to integrate with AP automation software and supplier relationship software. Integration with e-commerce
platforms and supply chain suites is also essential.
To qualify for inclusion in the Procure to Pay category, a product must:
Consolidate procurement information from multiple data sources
Manage all or most operations that are part of the procurement cycle
Create and implement purchasing policies and best practices
Monitor financial transactions related to procurement
Define and manage procurement business processes
Procure to Pay Grid® Scoring Description

Products shown on the Grid® for Procure to Pay have received a minimum of 10 reviews/ratings in data gathered by March 01, 2022. Products
are ranked by customer satisfaction (based on user reviews) and market presence (based on market share, seller size, and social impact) and
placed into four categories on the Grid®:
Products in the Leader quadrant are rated highly by G2 users and have substantial Market Presence scores. Leaders include: SAP Ariba
High Performing products have high customer Satisfaction scores and low Market Presence compared to the rest of the category. High
Performers include: Precoro, Jaggaer, PRM360, Planergy, BuyerQuest, Xelix, and MHC Software
Contender products have relatively low customer Satisfaction scores and high Market Presence compared to the rest of the category.
While they may have positive reviews, they do not have enough reviews to validate those ratings. Contenders include: Coupa
Procurement, Oracle Procurement Cloud, and Basware
Niche products have relatively low Satisfaction scores and low Market Presence compared to the rest of the category. While they
may have positive reviews, they do not have enough reviews to validate those ratings. Niche products include: Tradeshift and Vroozi
Procurement Platform
© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 2

Grid® Scores for Procure to Pay Software

The table below shows the Satisfaction and Market Presence scores that determine product placement on the Grid®. To learn more about each
of the products, please see the profile section.
Leaders
# of Reviews Satisfaction Market Presence G2 Score
SAP Ariba 180 72 95 83
High Performers
Precoro 71 89 50 69
Jaggaer 12 69 48 59
PRM360 48 91 21 56
Planergy 14 69 22 46
BuyerQuest 43 73 15 44
Xelix 16 72 10 41
MHC Software 19 62 18 40
Contenders
Coupa 57 37 67 52
Oracle EPM Cloud 16 32 68 50
Basware 21 5 76 40
Niche
Tradeshift Pay 36 23 42 32
Vroozi 10 39 7 23
* Products are ordered by G2 Score. Satisfaction score is used as a tiebreaker if two products have the same G2 Score.

Grid® Methodology
Grid® Rating Methodology
The Grid® represents the democratic voice of real software users, rather than the subjective opinion of one analyst. G2 rates products from
the Procure to Pay category algorithmically based on data sourced from product reviews shared by G2 users and data aggregated from online
sources and social networks.
Technology buyers can use the Grid® to help them quickly select the best products for their businesses and to find peers with similar
experiences. For sellers, media, investors, and analysts, the Grid® provides benchmarks for product comparison and market trend analysis.
Grid® Scoring Methodology

G2 rates products and sellers based on reviews gathered from our user community, as well as data aggregated from online sources and social
networks. We apply a unique algorithm (v3.0) to this data to calculate the Satisfaction and Market Presence scores in real time. The Grid®
Report for Procure to Pay | Spring 2022 is based on scores calculated using the G2 algorithm v3.0 from reviews collected through March 01,
2022. To view the Procure to Pay Grid® with the most recent data, please visit the Procure to Pay page.
Satisfaction
The Satisfaction rating is affected by the following (in order of importance):
Customer satisfaction with end user-focused product attributes based on user reviews
Popularity and statistical significance based on the number of reviews received by G2
Quality of reviews received (reviews that are more thoroughly completed will be weighted more heavily)
Age of reviews (more-recent reviews provide relevant and up-to-date information that is reflective of the current state of a product)
Customers’ satisfaction with administration-specific product attributes based on user reviews
Overall customer satisfaction and Net Promoter Score® (NPS) based on ratings by G2 users
Note: The customer satisfaction score is normalized for each Grid®, meaning the scores are relative.
(Grid® Methodology continues on next page)
** Net Promoter, Net Promoter System, Net Promoter Score, NPS and the NPS-related emoticons are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Inc., Fred Reichheld and Satmetrix
Systems, Inc.

Grid® Methodology (continued)

Market Presence
The Market Presence score is affected by the following (in order of importance):
Market presence is a combination of 15 metrics from G2’s reviews, publicly available information, and third-party sources
Both the software sellers and the individual products are measured on various criteria. The criteria are listed in order of importance.
Products metric receive greater weight than seller metrics
Criteria Measured For Metrics
Product Seller
Number of Employees √ √ Employee Count (based on social networks and public sources)
Reviews √ Review Count (weighted by recency)
Web Presence √ √
Social Presence √ √
Growth √ √ Employee Growth, Web Presence Growth
Seller Age √
Employee Satisfaction and Engagement √
Each input is normalized by category and segment. This means that scores are relative to other products in the category/segment and may
change from segment to segment
The scores are then scaled from 0-100
Grid® Categorization Methodology

Making G2 research relevant and easy for people to use as they evaluate and select business software products is one of our most important
goals. In support of that goal, organizing products and software companies in a well-defined structure that makes capturing, evaluating, and
displaying reviews and other research in an orderly manner is a critical part of the research process.
To manage the process of categorizing the software products and the related reviews in the G2 community, G2 follows a publicly available categorization
methodology. All products appearing on the Grid® have passed through G2’s categorization methodology and meet G2’s category standards.
Many terms that appear regularly across G2 and are used to aid in product categorization warrant a definition to facilitate buyer understanding.
These terms may be included within reviews from the G2 community or in executive summaries for products included on the Grid®. A list of
standard definitions is available to G2 users to eliminate confusion and ease the buying process.
(Grid® Methodology continues on next page)

Grid® Methodology (continued)

Rating Changes and Dynamics
The ratings in this report are based on a snapshot of the user reviews and social data collected by G2 up through March 01, 2022. The ratings
may change as the products are further developed, the sellers grow, and as additional opinions are shared by users. G2 updates the ratings
on its website in real time as additional data is received, and this report will be updated as significant data is received. By improving their
products and support and/or by having more satisfied customer voices heard, Contenders may become Leaders and Niche sellers may
become High Performers.
Trust
Keeping our ratings unbiased is our top priority. We require the use of a LinkedIn account or verified business email address to validate a G2
user’s identity and employer. We also validate users by partnering with sellers and organizations to securely authenticate users through select
platforms. We do not allow users to review their current or former employers’ products, or those of their employers’ competitors. Additionally,
all reviews are manually checked by our team after our algorithm filters out reviews that don’t meet our submission requirements. All reviews
must pass our moderation process before they are published.
Our G2 staff does not add any subjective input to the ratings, which are determined algorithmically based on data aggregated from publicly
available online sources and social networks. sellers cannot influence their ratings by spending time or money with us. Only the opinion of real
users and data from public sources factor into the ratings.
Grid® Inclusion Criteria

All products in a G2 category that have at least 10 reviews from real users of the product are included on the Grid®. Inviting other users, such
as colleagues and peers, to join G2 and share authentic product reviews will accelerate this process.
If a product is not yet listed on G2 and it fits the market definition above, then users are encouraged to suggest its addition to our Procure to
Pay category.
Product Profiles
Product profiles and detailed charts are included for products with 10 or more reviews.

SAP Ariba
3.9 (315) SAP Ariba has been named a Leader based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score
and having a large Market Presence. SAP Ariba has the largest Market Presence among
products in Procure to Pay. 91% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 81% of users believe it is
headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend SAP Ariba at
a rate of 84%. SAP Ariba is also in the Accounts Payable (AP) and Spend Analysis, Contract
Management, Purchasing, Strategic Sourcing, Invoice Management, Supplier Relationship
Management, Spend Management, and Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) categories.
Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Quality of Support
Information Technology 16
78% and Services
Avg 88%
Oil & Energy 12
Ease of Use
82% Automotive 9
Avg 91% Computer Software 9

Meets Requirements Electrical/Electronic 8
84% Manufacturing
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
84%
Avg 90%
Ease of Doing Business With
81%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
82%
Avg 88%
Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Visibility Sourcing
89% 85%
Avg 94% Avg 92%
Invoicing Content
88% 86%
Avg 93% Avg 91%
Processes Contracts
88% 87%
Avg 91% Avg 90%
Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Total Revenue Employees Company Website

SAP Walldorf, Germany 1972 $27,338 (USD MM) (Listed On Linkedin™) www.sapstore.com
119647

Precoro
4.8 (92) Precoro has been named a High Performer product based on having high customer
Satisfaction scores and a low Market Presence compared to the rest of the category.
100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 97% of users believe it is headed in the right
direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Precoro at a rate of
96%. Precoro is also in the Vendor Management, Accounts Payable (AP) and Spend
Analysis, RFP, Purchasing, Strategic Sourcing, and Spend Management categories.

Quality of Support
Marketing and Advertising 14
98%
Avg 88% Computer Software 13
Ease of Use Information Technology 11

95% and Services
Avg 91% Retail 4

Meets Requirements Architecture & Planning 2
94%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
94%
Avg 90%
94%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
95%
Avg 88%

Visibility Sourcing
98% 92%
Avg 94% Avg 92%
Spend Contracts
98% 95%
Avg 92% Avg 90%
Purchasing Processes
97% 95%
Avg 93% Avg 91%
Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Employees Company Website

Precoro Brooklyn, New York 2014 (Listed On Linkedin™) precoro.com
42

Jaggaer
4.5 (31) Jaggaer has been named a High Performer product based on having high customer
direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Jaggaer at a rate of 98%.
Jaggaer is also in the Spend Management, Strategic Sourcing, Contract Management,
Purchasing, Supplier Relationship Management, Accounts Payable (AP) and Spend
Analysis, and Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) categories.

Quality of Support
Education Management 9
96%
Avg 88% Higher Education 1
Ease of Use Oil & Energy 1

96% Pharmaceuticals 1
Avg 91%
Meets Requirements
98%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
N/A
Avg 90%
N/A
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
N/A
Avg 88%
*N/A is displayed when fewer than five responses were received for the question.

Contracts Content
96% 92%
Avg 90% Avg 91%
Processes Performance
95% 92%
Avg 91% Avg 92%
Spend Requisition
95% 93%
Avg 92% Avg 93%

Jaggaer Morrisville, NC 1995 (Listed On Linkedin™) www.jaggaer.com
1099

PRM360
4.9 (53) PRM360 has been named a High Performer product based on having high customer
PRM360 received the highest Satisfaction score among products in Procure to Pay.
direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend PRM360 at a rate of 98%.
PRM360 is also in the Vendor Management, Strategic Sourcing, Spend Management,
Accounts Payable (AP) and Spend Analysis, and Purchasing categories.

Quality of Support
Apparel & Fashion 20
96%
Avg 88% Textiles 12
Ease of Use Hospital & Health Care 4

97% Food Production 3
Avg 91%
Pharmaceuticals 2
Meets Requirements
99%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
N/A
Avg 90%
N/A
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
N/A
Avg 88%

Requisition Purchasing
99% 97%
Avg 93% Avg 93%
Performance Contracts
99% 97%
Avg 92% Avg 90%
Visibility Sourcing
99% 97%
Avg 94% Avg 92%

PRM360 Hyderabad, Telangana 2016 (Listed On Linkedin™) www.prm360.com
8

Planergy
4.9 (34) Planergy has been named a High Performer product based on having high customer
direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Planergy at a rate of 98%.
Planergy is also in the Purchasing and AP Automation categories.

Quality of Support
Staffing and Recruiting 2
92%
Avg 88% Computer & Network Security 1
Ease of Use Construction 1

94% Financial Services 1
Avg 91%
Food Production 1
Meets Requirements
97%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
91%
Avg 90%
94%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
94%
Avg 88%

Purchasing Invoicing
94% 89%
Avg 93% Avg 93%

PLANERGY Boston, Massachusetts 2009 (Listed On Linkedin™) planergy.com
17

BuyerQuest
4.7 (54) BuyerQuest has been named a High Performer product based on having high customer
98% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 93% of users believe it is headed in the right direction,
and users said they would be likely to recommend BuyerQuest at a rate of 94%.
BuyerQuest is also in the SAP Store, Strategic Sourcing, and Purchasing categories.

Quality of Support
Restaurants 10
93%
Avg 88% Food & Beverages 9
Ease of Use Education Management 6

93% Food Production 3
Avg 91%
Hospitality 3
Meets Requirements
96%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
95%
Avg 90%
N/A
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
95%
Avg 88%

Spend Content
100% 97%
Avg 92% Avg 91%
Visibility Requisition
100% 97%
Avg 94% Avg 93%
Invoicing Sourcing
100% 97%
Avg 93% Avg 92%

BuyerQuest Cleveland, Ohio 2011 (Listed On Linkedin™) buyerquest.com
15

Xelix
4.7 (23) Xelix has been named a High Performer product based on having high customer
direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Xelix at a rate of 93%.
Xelix is also in the Financial Audit and E-commerce Fraud Protection categories.

Quality of Support
Accounting 4
97%
Avg 88% Automotive 2
Ease of Use Broadcast Media 2

97% Banking 1
Avg 91%
Chemicals 1
Meets Requirements
95%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
98%
Avg 90%
98%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
93%
Avg 88%

Xelix London, United 2017 (Listed On Linkedin™) www.xelix.com
Kingdom 56

MHC Software
4.7 (57) MHC Software has been named a High Performer product based on having high
customer Satisfaction scores and a low Market Presence compared to the rest of the
category. 100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 92% of users believe it is headed in the
right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend MHC Software at a
rate of 95%. MHC Software is also in the Business Process Management, Enterprise
Content Management (ECM), AP Automation, and HR Service Delivery categories.

Quality of Support
Hospital & Health Care 10
99%
Avg 88% Primary/Secondary 2
Education
Ease of Use
90% Utilities 2
Avg 91% Accounting 1

Meets Requirements Building Materials 1
93%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
88%
Avg 90%
95%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
87%
Avg 88%

Invoicing Processes
97% 93%
Avg 93% Avg 91%

MHC Software Burnsville, MN 1980 (Listed On Linkedin™) www.mhcsoftwareinc.com
561

Coupa Procurement
4.1 (103) Coupa Procurement has been named a Contender product based on having a
relatively low customer Satisfaction score and large Market Presence compared
to the rest of the category. While they may have positive reviews, they do not have
enough reviews to validate those ratings. 93% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 90% of
users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to
recommend Coupa at a rate of 84%. Coupa is also in the Purchasing and Strategic
Sourcing categories.

Quality of Support
Computer Software 8
78%
Avg 88% Information Technology 7
and Services
Ease of Use
88% Higher Education 3
Avg 91% Retail 3

Meets Requirements Telecommunications 3
81%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
77%
Avg 90%
83%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
74%
Avg 88%

Purchasing Contracts
90% 80%
Avg 93% Avg 90%
Visibility Spend
89% 83%
Avg 94% Avg 92%
Sourcing Content
89% 84%
Avg 92% Avg 91%

Coupa Software San Mateo, CA 2006 $390 (USD MM) (Listed On Linkedin™) www.coupa.com
2970

Oracle Procurement Cloud

4.1 (33) Oracle Procurement Cloud has been named a Contender product based on having a
relatively low customer Satisfaction score and large Market Presence compared to the
rest of the category. While they may have positive reviews, they do not have enough
reviews to validate those ratings. 100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 100% of users believe
it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend
Oracle EPM Cloud at a rate of 87%. Oracle EPM Cloud is also in the Contract Management,
Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM), Purchasing, and Vendor Management categories.

Quality of Support
Construction 2
86%
Avg 88% Information Technology 2
and Services
Ease of Use
84% Oil & Energy 2
Avg 91% Apparel & Fashion 1

Meets Requirements Automotive 1
91%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
N/A
Avg 90%
N/A
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
N/A
Avg 88%

Visibility Purchasing
97% 88%
Avg 94% Avg 93%
Performance Requisition
94% 89%
Avg 92% Avg 93%
Sourcing Invoicing
91% 89%
Avg 92% Avg 93%

Oracle Austin, TX 1977 $39,068 (USD MM) (Listed On Linkedin™) www.oracle.com
214452

Basware
3.4 (24) Basware has been named a Contender product based on having a relatively low customer
Satisfaction score and large Market Presence compared to the rest of the category.
While they may have positive reviews, they do not have enough reviews to validate those
ratings. 62% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 33% of users believe it is headed in the right
direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Basware at a rate of 68%.
Basware is also in the Contract Management, Purchasing, Strategic Sourcing, Invoice
Management, AP Automation, Supplier Relationship Management, Spend Management,
and Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) categories.

Quality of Support
Accounting 3
53%
Avg 88% Pharmaceuticals 2
Ease of Use Automotive 1

76% Civil Engineering 1
Avg 91%
Computer Software 1
Meets Requirements
75%
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
N/A
Avg 90%
76%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
N/A
Avg 88%

Basware Espoo, Finland 1985 $149 (USD MM) (Listed On Linkedin™) www.basware.com
1588

Tradeshift
3.8 (214) Tradeshift has been named a Niche product based on having a relatively low
Satisfaction score and low Market Presence compared to the rest of the category.
While they may have positive reviews, they do not have enough reviews to validate
those ratings. 94% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 81% of users believe it is headed in
the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Tradeshift Pay
at a rate of 85%. Tradeshift Pay is also in the Purchasing, Vendor Management, AP
Automation, and Supplier Relationship Management categories.

Quality of Support
Computer Software 2
85%
Avg 88% Electrical/Electronic 2
Manufacturing
Ease of Use
89% Marketing and Advertising 2
Avg 91% Mechanical or Industrial 2

Engineering
Meets Requirements
90% Sporting Goods 2
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
88%
Avg 90%
86%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
86%
Avg 88%

Requisition Content
90% 83%
Avg 93% Avg 91%
Performance Contracts
89% 84%
Avg 92% Avg 90%
Invoicing Visibility
89% 84%
Avg 93% Avg 94%

Tradeshift San Francisco, California 2009 (Listed On Linkedin™) tradeshift.com
703

Vroozi Procurement Platform

4.5 (11) Vroozi Procurement Platform has been named a Niche product based on having a
relatively low Satisfaction score and low Market Presence compared to the rest of
the category. While they may have positive reviews, they do not have enough reviews
to validate those ratings. 100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 100% of users believe
it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend
Vroozi at a rate of 92%. Vroozi is also in the Invoice Management, AP Automation,
Purchasing, and Spend Management categories.

Quality of Support
Information Technology 5
92% and Services
Avg 88%
Hospital & Health Care 2
Ease of Use
97% Automotive 1
Avg 91% Online Media 1

Meets Requirements Transportation/Trucking/ 1
87% Railroad
Avg 91%
Ease of Admin
94%
Avg 90%
94%
Avg 89%
Ease of Setup
90%
Avg 88%

Vroozi Irvine, CA 2015 (Listed On Linkedin™) www.vroozi.com
56

Satisfaction Ratings for Procure to Pay

G2 reviewers rated software sellers’ ability to satisfy their needs as shown in the table below.
Satisfaction Satisfaction by Category Net Promoter Score (NPS)
Product Going Ease of

Likely to Meets Ease of Quality of Ease of Ease Net Promoter Score (NPS)
in Right Doing
Recommend Requirements Admin Support Setup of Use (Range from -100 to +100)
Direction? Business
SAP Ariba 84% 81% 84% 84% 81% 78% 82% 82% 42
Precoro 96% 97% 94% 94% 94% 98% 95% 95% 92
Jaggaer 98% 92% 98% N/A N/A 96% N/A 96% 100
PRM360 98% 100% 99% N/A N/A 96% N/A 97% 100
Planergy 98% 88% 97% 91% 94% 92% 94% 94% 92
BuyerQuest 94% 93% 96% 95% N/A 93% 95% 93% 83
Xelix 93% 100% 95% 98% 98% 97% 93% 97% 81
MHC Software 95% 92% 93% 88% 95% 99% 87% 90% 84
Coupa 84% 90% 81% 77% 83% 78% 74% 88% 45
Oracle EPM Cloud 87% 100% 91% N/A N/A 86% N/A 84% 56
Basware 68% 33% 75% N/A 76% 53% N/A 76% -4
Tradeshift Pay 85% 81% 90% 88% 86% 85% 86% 89% 58
Vroozi 92% 100% 87% 94% 94% 92% 90% 97% 80
Average 90% 88% 91% 90% 89% 88% 88% 91% 70
**Net Promoter Score ranges from -100 to +100

Feature Comparison for Procure to Pay

G2 users have evaluated the following products by feature. Feature ratings are representative of reviewers’ overall satisfaction with each
feature and do not necessarily take into account the breadth of individual product features. The results are shown below.
Planning
Processes Contracts Content Requisition
SAP Ariba 88% 87% 86% 87%
Precoro 95% 95% 96% 97%
Jaggaer 95% 96% 92% 93%
PRM360 98% 97% 97% 99%
Planergy N/A N/A N/A N/A
BuyerQuest N/A N/A 97% 97%
Xelix N/A N/A N/A N/A
MHC Software 93% N/A N/A N/A
Coupa 84% 80% 84% 88%
Oracle EPM Cloud 91% 91% 91% 89%
Basware N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tradeshift Pay 87% 84% 83% 90%
Vroozi N/A N/A N/A N/A
Average 91% 90% 91% 93%
(Feature Comparison for Procure to Pay continues on next page)
**A blank box indicates that a seller has selected that they do not offer that feature.


(continued)
Execution
Sourcing Purchasing Invoicing
SAP Ariba 85% 88% 88%
Precoro 92% 97% 95%
Jaggaer 94% N/A N/A
PRM360 97% 97% 98%
Planergy N/A 94% 89%
BuyerQuest 97% 100% 100%
Xelix N/A N/A N/A
MHC Software 93% 97%
Coupa 89% 90% 88%
Oracle EPM Cloud 91% 88% 89%
Basware N/A N/A N/A
Tradeshift Pay 87% 89% 89%
Vroozi N/A N/A N/A
Average 92% 93% 93%
(Feature Comparison for Procure to Pay continues on next page)


(continued)
Analytics
Visibility Performance Spend
SAP Ariba 89% 87% 87%
Precoro 98% 97% 98%
Jaggaer 94% 92% 95%
PRM360 99% 99% 97%
Planergy N/A N/A N/A
BuyerQuest 100% N/A 100%
Xelix N/A N/A N/A
MHC Software
Coupa 89% 88% 83%
Basware N/A N/A N/A
Vroozi N/A N/A N/A
Average 94% 92% 92%

Additional Data for Procure to Pay

The table below includes a breakdown of the customer segments for each product, as represented by G2 reviewers.
Customers by Size
Small Business (50 or fewer emp.) Mid-Market (51-1000 emp.) Enterprise ( >1000 emp.)
SAP Ariba 9% 22% 68%
Precoro 37% 60% 3%
Jaggaer 8% 83% 8%
PRM360 0% 19% 81%
Planergy 50% 43% 7%
BuyerQuest 5% 64% 31%
Xelix 6% 13% 81%
MHC Software 11% 28% 61%
Coupa 5% 21% 73%
Basware 5% 38% 57%
Vroozi 30% 0% 70%
Average 17% 34% 49%
(Additional Data for Procure to Pay continues on next page)
*N/A is displayed when data is not publicly available.

Additional Data for Procure to Pay (continued)

The table below highlights implementation and deployment data as indicated in real user reviews on G2.
Implementation
Deployment Implementation Method
Cloud On-Premises In-House Team Seller Services Team Third-Party Consultant
SAP Ariba 100% 0% 42% 12% 27%
Precoro 86% 14% 64% 27% 0%
Jaggaer N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
PRM360 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Planergy 20% 80% 60% 0% 20%
BuyerQuest N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Xelix 40% 60% 80% 20% 0%
MHC Software 9% 91% 50% 30% 0%
Coupa 90% 10% 21% 21% 54%
Oracle EPM Cloud N/A N/A 60% 20% 20%
Basware N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tradeshift Pay 55% 45% 83% 17% 0%
Vroozi 100% 0% 60% 20% 20%


The table below highlights the average user adoption of each product as indicated in real user reviews on G2.
User Adoption
User Adoption
Average User Adoption
SAP Ariba 77%
Precoro 65%
Jaggaer N/A
PRM360 N/A
Planergy N/A
BuyerQuest N/A
Xelix 61%
MHC Software 70%
Coupa 60%
Oracle EPM Cloud N/A
Basware N/A
Tradeshift Pay 61%
Vroozi 91%
Average 69%


The table below highlights third-party market presence data used to inform the G2’s Market Presence Score that highlights each product’s
impact and influence in the category.
Market Presence
Employees Twitter
Revenue LinkedIn Glassdoor Alexa Web
Seller Name Year Founded on LinkedIn Followers
($MM) Followers Rating Traffic Rank
(Seller) (Seller)
SAP Ariba SAP 1972 $27,338 119,647 2,784,581 293,667 4.5 194,984
Precoro Precoro 2014 N/A 42 846 923 5.0 139,829
Jaggaer Jaggaer 1995 N/A 1,099 70,393 1,605 3.5 78,338
PRM360 PRM360 2016 N/A 8 1,227 17 N/A 4,495,084
Planergy PLANERGY 2009 N/A 17 418 0 N/A 118,798
BuyerQuest BuyerQuest 2011 N/A 15 1,800 1,363 4.2 1,583,340
Xelix Xelix 2017 N/A 56 1,031 120 5.0 851,908
MHC Software MHC Software 1980 N/A 561 3,243 0 4.2 N/A
Coupa
Coupa 2006 $390 2,970 65,945 22,571 4.2 48,663
Software
Oracle EPM Cloud Oracle 1977 $39,068 214,452 7,751,786 795,510 3.8 431
Basware Basware 1985 $149 1,588 32,916 11,486 4.0 96,290
Tradeshift Pay Tradeshift 2009 N/A 703 59,373 7,174 3.3 70,040
Vroozi Vroozi 2015 N/A 56 2,206 4,821 4.3 554,471

G2Grid ReportP2PSpring2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

G2Grid ReportP2PSpring2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Grid® Report for Procure to Pay

Procure to Pay Software

Niche High Performers

(Procure to Pay Software continues on next page)

Procure to Pay Software (continued)

To qualify for inclusion in the Procure to Pay category, a product must:

Consolidate procurement information from multiple data sources

Create and implement purchasing policies and best practices

Monitor financial transactions related to procurement

Define and manage procurement business processes

Procure to Pay Grid® Scoring Description

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 2

Grid® Scores for Procure to Pay Software

SAP Ariba 180 72 95 83

Oracle EPM Cloud 16 32 68 50

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 3

Grid® Scoring Methodology

The Satisfaction rating is affected by the following (in order of importance):

Popularity and statistical significance based on the number of reviews received by G2

Customers’ satisfaction with administration-specific product attributes based on user reviews

(Grid® Methodology continues on next page)

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 4

Grid® Methodology (continued)

Criteria Measured For Metrics

Reviews √ Review Count (weighted by recency)

The scores are then scaled from 0-100

Grid® Categorization Methodology

(Grid® Methodology continues on next page)

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 5

Grid® Methodology (continued)

Grid® Inclusion Criteria

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 6

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Avg 91% Computer Software 9

Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Total Revenue Employees Company Website

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 7

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Ease of Use Information Technology 11

Avg 91% Retail 4

Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Employees Company Website

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 8

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Ease of Use Oil & Energy 1

Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Employees Company Website

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 9

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Ease of Use Hospital & Health Care 4

Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Employees Company Website

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 10

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Ease of Use Construction 1

Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Employees Company Website

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 11

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented

Ease of Use Education Management 6

Highest-Rated Features Lowest-Rated Features

Ownership HQ Location Year Founded Employees Company Website

© 2022 G2, Inc. All rights reserved. 12

Satisfaction Ratings Top Industries Represented