The easiest route - we'll conduct a 15 minute phone interview and write up the review for you.
Use our online form to submit your review. It's quick and you can post anonymously.
The users fall into two groups. The first is those looking for a consolidation solution to replace HFM, the Oracle product. HFM is aging out, and OneStream is a great fit as a replacement.
The other group wants a single product solution for everything – forecasting, planning, consolidation, and reporting. They don't want to switch between multiple products, and they can do it all in OneStream. That 'one version of the truth' concept is what they're looking for.
Think about how consolidations work – you're doing one month or quarter at a time. But with projections, you could be going out one, two, or three years. So you're processing multiple months at a time.
Earlier versions excelled at one month or one quarter, but they were a little clunky when doing 36 months out. OneStream has since fixed that; it's much better and more efficient now. My experience was going from something a bit chunky to something quite good in the current version.
Moreover, the analytics capabilities in OneStream XF are quite beneficial.
The BI-type capability is what OneStream calls 'blended analytics.' It's more about ad-hoc queries and insights rather than standard monthly reports. It asks, "What's happening in my business? Am I selling more red widgets or blue widgets?"
This is a solid innovation. OneStream can hook into transactional data, not just balance-oriented data. It's like your bank statement: the final balance is like a traditional report, but blended analytics lets you see every transaction – where money comes in and goes out. It's powerful, and they're ahead of the market with this. It fits their mentality of a single-user interface. No need to train people on a separate BI product – you can do it all within OneStream.
I can put it into two buckets again.
One is this: with multiple products, you have multiple versions of your data needing reconciliation, multiple products to train users on, and different processes... it can take several months. Having one system that does it all, looking back at the past and forward to the future, is a big advantage.
The other bucket is ease of use. This impacts not only the end-user experience but also the administrator's, which affects the total cost of ownership. An easier-to-administer product means less employee turnover due to frustration, and you can often hire less expensive resources. You don't need a PhD to run it, lowering organizational costs and improving administrator happiness.
There's always stuff on the drawing board, and there's an arms race going on in the AI space. It's too soon to pick a winner between OneStream and Oracle. OneStream's smaller, so maybe they're more nimble, but Oracle has more resources. AI is where I see the most innovation and progress, but it's not fully developed yet.
The other thing is that there are probably little things in the UI and overall processes that could be made easier to use. But there's nothing so consequential that it ruins your experience. It's more about tweaking and streamlining certain processes within the system.
I have been using it since they were founded, probably going back to around 2012.
When it comes to scalability, this is where a good implementation matters. If you have a knowledgeable project team, they can set it up to scale well.
But organizations change. For example, I built something three years ago, it works fine, and then suddenly you merge with your biggest competitor. Doubling your size adds complexity. You are twice the size you used to be, and there is added complexity.
You can run into problems with the existing setup, but that's true of Oracle products or any software. It's really because of the event, not the software itself.
I'd give them 110% if I could. They're so focused on customer service and success. It's a huge factor for them. No one else in the market can touch them.
Unlike some companies where you get an automated chatbot, these guys are committed to having a real person on the phone. Not someone in a call center reading a script, but someone who can answer your question and solve your problem. I don't think anyone else does that.
Positive
It's not a do-it-yourself job. All products in this space require assistance. That's why both Oracle and OneStream have partner firms for initial implementation.
The overall goal in the marketplace is to shorten implementation time and get it to a maintenance mode where the customer can run it independently. That's been the trend for years – simplifying implementation.
However, none of the products are at the 'fill out a form, click next' level of setup yet. You still need someone who knows what they're doing.
We were implementers. We were a consulting firm and implemented OneStream.
The size of the deployment team depends on the customer and the size of the project. You could have a small company with a one or two-person team – a senior resource as the architect and a junior resource handling the logistics.
But then you have huge companies with large project teams of 16 or 20 people.
It depends on two main factors:
Usually, just one person is enough for the maintenance. The products have gotten to the point where they're pretty easy to maintain. Often, it's not even a full FTE. One person can handle the administration alongside other responsibilities.
The product has a license by the user. They're on par with other competitors. One thing to consider is their relationship with Microsoft. They often push customers towards Azure, and Azure can get pricey as your footprint grows.
So, pound for pound, OneStream might be a little cheaper in some ways. But, with large implementations, the Microsoft cloud costs can become significant. Of course, you could move it to Google, AWS, or even bring it in-house, but cloud costs add up over time.
I would recommend it. It's not the right fit for smaller, less complex companies. But once you reach a certain size and complexity, it's the product I'd tell people to go to. Obviously, it's not the cheapest, but once your complexity increases, you need a more sophisticated product.
Overall, I would rate this product a ten out of ten. I think very highly of the company, the people, and the product itself.
They don't allow reselling. Unlike Oracle or SAP, they do direct sales. It's a bit old school, but it ties into their focus on customer service. They want a direct relationship with the customer.
We use OneStream XF for our organization's consolidation, planning, and budgeting.
The product's most valuable feature is extensibility. Data integration is another best feature, where you can integrate rest API files.
It is complicated to download the metadata when we have to make changes. We should be able to download the data in the same format we upload it. It will help us edit it and reload it quickly. Additionally, its debugging capabilities for particular code need improvement.
We have been using OneStream XF for four years.
I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten.
We have 1900 OneStream XF users. I rate its scalability a ten out of ten.
The technical support team should provide complete solutions to the queries.
Neutral
The initial setup is easy. I rate the process a ten out of ten. It takes a year for implementation and requires a team of ten executives to conduct the procedure.
I rate OneStream XF's pricing a seven or eight out of ten. The licensing is expensive.
I rate OneStream XF's a ten out of ten. It is the best product to use. It has all the essential features.
