Planful vs Vena Solutions: Complete Comparison for FP&A Teams
Which FP&A platform delivers better modelling, reporting, Excel flexibility, and total cost of ownership?
Executive Summary
Planful and Vena are two of the most widely selected FP&A solutions in the mid-market. They often show up together in evaluations because they anchor opposite ends of the modern FP&A spectrum:
Vena is an Excel-native FP&A platform — "Excel, but with structure, database, workflows, and controls."
Planful is a purpose-built cloud FP&A platform — designed for fast implementations, strong reporting, and high usability across finance and business partners.
Both deliver strong budgeting, forecasting, and reporting. Both are built for 100–5,000 employee companies. Both beat spreadsheets by orders of magnitude.
CFO Shortlist Verdict
Choose Planful if you want faster time-to-value, modern modelling, strong dashboards, and a platform finance can own without Excel dependency.
Choose Vena if you want to stay in Excel, need deep spreadsheet-style modelling flexibility, or have a large population of Excel power users who want minimal change management.
For most mid-market FP&A teams upgrading from Excel today, Planful is the more future-proof platform, unless Excel-centric workflows are non-negotiable.
Quick Comparison Table
Vendor Overview
Planful
Planful is a cloud FP&A platform built for usability, speed, and powerful reporting. It delivers fast implementations and is designed to be owned entirely by FP&A — no deep technical expertise required. It's widely adopted across mid-market organizations moving from Excel or legacy budgeting tools.
Great for:
- Finance teams wanting modern workflows
- Companies needing high adoption across departments
- CFOs prioritizing clean reporting and oversight
- Organizations looking for quick wins and predictable TCO
Vena Solutions
Vena is the leading Excel-native FP&A platform, designed for teams that want Excel to remain the core modelling interface — but with enterprise-grade structure, database integration, workflow, and version control. Vena doesn't try to replace Excel; it supercharges it.
Great for:
- Excel-heavy FP&A teams
- CFOs with models deeply rooted in spreadsheets
- Organizations with strong Excel culture
- Teams wanting to modernize without changing how they model
Architecture & Modelling Engine
Planful — Cloud-native, flexible, structured
Planful's modelling engine:
- Built fully in the cloud
- Structured templates + flexible model spaces
- Real-time updates across models
- Easy to adjust without technical debt
- Strong balance of control + freedom
This gives finance teams a system that scales beyond spreadsheets but doesn't require enterprise-grade complexity.
Vena — Excel as the modelling layer
Vena's modelling paradigm is:
- Excel for ALL modelling and templates
- A centralized database beneath
- Workflow + audit + versioning layered on top
- No need to rebuild models in a new UI
- All your finance logic stays in Excel
This is Vena's superpower (and limitation). It offers infinite flexibility, but Excel logic still requires Excel skills and maintenance.
Planning, Forecasting & Scenario Modelling
Planful strengths
- Rolling forecasts
- Multidimensional driver-based models
- Operational & headcount planning
- Cross-functional forecasting across departments
- Visual scenario toggles
- CFO-grade reporting immediately available
Planful is ideal for teams maturing past spreadsheet mechanics.
Vena strengths
- Complex Excel-based forecasting
- Deep financial statement modelling
- Headcount planning via templates
- Scenario modelling through Excel copies + workflow
- Teams who want to keep Excel logic intact
Vena gives power users maximum modelling freedom within Excel — great for technical modellers.
UX, Adoption & Business User Experience
Planful
- Clean, modern UI
- Great dashboards
- Every department leader can learn it in minutes
- Minimal training
- High adoption because it feels intuitive
This is where Planful wins almost by default.
Vena
- Perfect for Excel users
- Higher friction for non-Excel-heavy departments
- Templates are easy to distribute, but editing requires spreadsheet comfort
- Stakeholders who hate spreadsheets may disengage
If your org lives and breathes Excel: Vena feels like home. If not? Planful wins.
Integrations & Data Management
Planful
- Strong mid-market ERP connections (NetSuite, Intacct, BC)
- Pre-built connectors
- Good CRM & HRIS coverage
- Good for both "data-light" and "data-mature" orgs
Vena
- Integrates cleanly with Excel and CSVs
- Good ERP connectors
- Business users often bring their own data exports
- Strong for environments without data warehouses
Vena is elite when your data world is spreadsheet-centric. Planful is better for scaling up into more integrated planning.
Implementation Speed & Complexity
Planful
- Typical go-live: 6–12 weeks
- FP&A can take ownership quickly
- Lighter admin burden
- Lower implementation risk
Vena
- Go-live: 8–14 weeks
- Excel template development is intensive
- Higher dependence on internal Excel skill
- Admin requires maintaining many templates
AI, Automation & Roadmap
Planful
AI is focused on pragmatic FP&A:
- Variance explanations
- Forecast suggestions
- Anomaly detection
- Narrative automation
Planful's roadmap moves fast and stays finance-centered.
Vena
Vena is integrating AI primarily through Excel-based flows:
- AI-assisted formula building
- AI-supported analysis in Excel
- Generative insights layered on models
- AI governance within templates
Vena's AI future is strong — but limited by Excel's constraints.
Pricing & Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
Planful
- License tier: $$–$$$
- Lower implementation cost
- Lower admin cost
- Predictable 3-year TCO
Vena
- License tier: $$–$$$
- Implementation depends on template complexity
- Admin cost depends on Excel-heavy workflows
- 3-year TCO similar to Planful if models remain stable
Ideal Customer Fit
Choose Planful if:
- You want a modern platform, not Excel dependency
- You want strong dashboards and CFO-ready reporting
- You want broad departmental adoption
- You value speed, simplicity, and scalability
- You want FP&A to own the system without template chaos
- You are preparing to scale beyond Excel's limitations
Choose Vena if:
- Your models are deeply embedded in Excel today
- Your FP&A team has multiple Excel power users
- You want to modernize without changing how you model
- Department leaders are comfortable with Excel input templates
- You want Excel flexibility with system controls
- You want a "structured spreadsheet FP&A stack"
CFO Shortlist Final Verdict
Planful and Vena both solve FP&A problems extremely well — but the right choice depends on your Excel culture and planning maturity:
Planful is the better choice for most mid-market FP&A teams because it offers faster time-to-value, broader adoption, stronger reporting, and lower platform friction.
Vena is ideal for Excel-heavy teams that want power and flexibility without giving up spreadsheets.
Your organization's goal is to modernize planning across multiple departments with a clean, intuitive platform. You want speed, simplicity, and scalability.
Your goal is to preserve Excel as your modelling backbone with enterprise workflow and controls. Your team has deep Excel expertise and culture.
Related Resources
FAQs
Which platform is better for Excel-heavy organizations?
Vena is specifically designed for Excel-native FP&A workflows. If your team has deep Excel expertise, complex spreadsheet models, and a culture built around Excel, Vena allows you to modernize without abandoning spreadsheets. Planful is better if you want to move beyond Excel dependency and adopt a modern cloud-native platform.
How do Planful and Vena differ on business user adoption?
Planful excels at business user adoption with its clean, modern UI that requires minimal training. Department leaders can learn it in minutes and it feels intuitive even for non-finance users. Vena requires comfort with Excel—stakeholders who aren't Excel-savvy may find it less intuitive, though Excel power users will feel right at home.
Which platform offers faster implementation?
Planful typically delivers go-live in 6–12 weeks with lighter admin burden and lower implementation risk. Vena typically requires 8–14 weeks, with Excel template development being more intensive and requiring higher dependence on internal Excel skills. Planful is generally easier and less brittle over time.
Sources
- Planful product pages, AI features, and 2025 roadmap announcements.
- Vena Solutions product documentation, Excel-native features, and 2025 roadmap briefings.
- CFO Shortlist FP&A benchmark data (2024–2025).
- Vendor demos, customer reference interviews, and independent reviews.
Need an EPM Shortlist?
Our analysts can help you narrow vendors and build ROI guardrails in under 48 hours—reach out when you're ready.