6 Reasons Aimplan Outshines Acterys for Modern Financial Planning

1. Acterys Data Warehouse Requirements: The Acterys solution requires hosting a dedicated data warehouse within the Acterys SaaS environment, where both dimensional and transactional (actuals) data must be stored. This means that organizations are often forced to upload their data into the Acterys warehouse, even if they already have an existing data warehouse or Power BI financial model. This approach can create redundancy and increase data management complexity. The requirement to store data in the Acterys environment may also limit the flexibility and control organizations have over their own data.

 

2. Complexity in Configuring Business Rules: While Acterys allows users to edit and save data within Power BI, configuring business rules—such as cost allocations or other complex calculations—typically requires SQL knowledge. These business rules are often implemented using SQL stored procedures within the Acterys database, making it difficult for non-technical users to create and maintain solutions independently. This reliance on SQL can increase the learning curve and limit accessibility for teams without deep technical expertise.

 

3. Enforced Data Model: The Acterys data model is based on a concept of “cubes,” which are essentially fact and dimensional tables within a relational database. However, these are not true OLAP cubes, and the model requires customer data to be inserted and stored in specific Acterys tables. This enforced data model can be limiting, particularly when key fields or IDs must be numerical values, which might not align with real-world data practices. For instance, article numbers must be numeric (e.g., "1234") rather than alphanumeric (e.g., "A1234"), complicating implementations that rely on more flexible data formats.

 

4. Limitations in Planning Visuals: For budgeting, forecasting, and write-back functionality, Acterys relies heavily on its Matrix visual, which operates similarly to a pivot table in Excel. While this may work for basic planning scenarios, more complex planning forms often require greater flexibility. The Matrix visual’s limitations can make it difficult to create the detailed, dynamic planning forms that many organizations need for accurate forecasting and scenario analysis.

 

5. User Friendliness: Although Acterys is designed with user-friendliness in mind, certain aspects of the interface are not fully optimized for ease of use. For example, users must enable edit mode on the Matrix visual by clicking a button before they can begin updating numbers. Additionally, the navigation within planning forms can be cumbersome, as users can only move left or right on the same row using the Tab key, rather than being able to navigate freely with arrow keys as in a spreadsheet. Many use cases also rely on the generic 'Acterys Table Edit' visual, which may not be ideal for specific tasks.

 

6. Performance Issues: There have been reports of slow performance during save operations, with some users experiencing delays of 60 seconds or more when trying to save updated data within the Acterys Matrix visual. This lag can disrupt workflows and reduce overall productivity, particularly in fast-paced environments where timely data updates are critical.