Choose FloQast if a controller owns the close and the SOX programme and wants both in one accounting-owned tool. Choose Trintech Cadency if you are a large, public or global group where matching volume and audit evidence set the requirements. The deciding factor is scale: Trintech itself positions Cadency for large, complex, public and global organizations and routes leaner teams to Adra instead.
FloQast is an accounting-owned close with SOX 404a and 404b packages and no per-user fees. Trintech Cadency is an enterprise close platform with high-volume matching, intercompany and an audit-ready eBinder, licensed module by module. Neither publishes a price. Trintech routes leaner teams to its own lighter product, Adra.
Both vendors' prices were read off their own pricing pages on 25 September 2026, and this comparison was last reviewed on 15 October 2026. Neither vendor publishes a price, so the only honest comparison is of what drives each quote. Figures we could not trace to a vendor page are not on this page at all.
We rely on vendor documentation, pricing pages and other primary sources. We do not use G2 or Capterra ratings as ranking inputs.
Material corrections can be submitted through the contact page. We update pages when a claim can be verified against a stronger source.
Read the full review methodology and sponsored disclosure.
Trintech draws the line for you. It positions Cadency for large, complex, public and global organizations and Adra for mid-enterprise teams. FloQast and Numeric also target mid-market close teams. So if you are not the large, complex, public and global profile, the vendor is telling you that a different product of its own fits better, and that is worth more than any comparison table.
At the top end the comparison is real. Cadency covers reconciliations, high-volume transaction matching, close management, journal entries, intercompany and compliance, with an eBinder that keeps close support ready for auditors. FloQast ties reconciliations to the ERP trial balance, automates rollforwards and journal entries, and sells SOX packages, with AI agents that handle matching, accruals and allocations under human sign-off.
FloQast is close management software: the close checklist and reconciliations tied to the ERP trial balance, rollforwards and journal entry automation, with SOX 404a and 404b packages next to the close products. Trintech Cadency is enterprise close software: reconciliations, high-volume transaction matching, close management, journal entries, intercompany and compliance, with an online eBinder that keeps close support ready for auditors. That overlap is real, which is why the two end up on the same shortlist, but the design assumptions underneath differ.
Keep FloQast on the list if this is you: mid-market and enterprise controllers who own both the close and SOX. Drop it if this is closer: a team whose matching volume has outgrown a checklist-led tool. The limitation worth naming up front is that six quote-based packages make scoping slow, and the highest matching volumes are where buyers also look at enterprise platforms.
Keep Trintech Cadency on the list if this is you: large, public or global accounting teams with strict audit evidence requirements. Drop it if this is closer: a team leaner than a large enterprise, which Trintech itself routes to Adra. Its own limitation is that planning is not among the modules, and a leaner team is the profile Trintech points at Adra instead.
Where FloQast genuinely competes at enterprise scale is SOX. Trintech's own material notes that the highest matching volumes are where buyers look at enterprise platforms, while FloQast's compliance packages sit with the close. A large group whose real problem is 404b testing rather than matching volume should not be talked into a matching engine.
Close management for mid-market and enterprise controllers who own both the close and SOX. No free trial is listed on the pricing page.
Custom quote pricing, Cloud deployment, runs on Web, and no free trial listed.
FloQast is the easier choice for mid-market and enterprise controllers who own both the close and SOX. Pick it when the controller owns both the close and SOX and wants them in one place.
Enterprise close for large, public or global accounting teams with strict audit evidence requirements. No free trial is listed; Trintech offers a book-a-demo form.
Custom quote pricing, Cloud / On-prem deployment, runs on Web, and no free trial listed.
Trintech Cadency is the easier choice for large, public or global accounting teams with strict audit evidence requirements. Pick it when public-company reporting and audit evidence set the requirements.
The table below carries the facts you can check without a sales call: pricing model, deployment, platform support and trial access. Read it before the demos, then use the sections underneath for the parts that depend on your own environment.
Both are quote-only with no listed trial, so the two rows buyers want are blank for both. Deployment profile is the signal: one is controller-owned, the other is an enterprise project with modules licensed one by one.
Pricing model
Custom quote
Deployment model
Cloud
Supported OS
Web
Free trial
Not listed
Pricing model
Custom quote
Deployment model
Cloud / On-prem
Supported OS
Web
Free trial
Not listed
| Criteria | ProductFloQast | ProductTrintech Cadency |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Deployment model | Cloud | Cloud / On-prem |
| Supported OS | Web | Web |
| Free trial | Not listed | Not listed |
Neither vendor publishes a price, so the only honest comparison is of what drives each quote. There are no dollar figures to put side by side below, and that is the finding rather than a gap in the research: both vendors' own pages were read on 25 September 2026 and neither carries a price.
FloQast publishes no prices. Its pricing page lists six packages, from Close Optimization to FloQast Transform, all behind Contact Sales, and states there are no per-user fees. Trial: No free trial is listed on the pricing page.
Trintech publishes no Cadency prices and trintech.com/pricing returns a 404; Cadency is sold on a quote with modules licensed separately. Trial: No free trial is listed; Trintech offers a book-a-demo form.
The two quote structures pull in opposite directions. FloQast states there are no per-user fees but sells six packages, with reporting, consolidation and the AI agent packages extra on top of the close products. Cadency licenses reconciliations, matching, close management, journals, intercompany and compliance separately, so a full-scope quote adds up module by module.
Ask Trintech to price Adra alongside Cadency. It costs nothing to request and it is the fastest way to find out whether the enterprise framing matches your scope or the sales process. On the FloQast side, ask which of the six packages you would license in year one and which in year two, then price both.
What moves the FloQast number: six packages scoped separately: Close Optimization, Close Automation, Connected Compliance, Compliance Pro, FloQast Reporting and FloQast Transform. Reporting, consolidation and the AI agent packages cost extra on top of the close products. For Trintech Cadency: reconciliations, matching, close management, journals, intercompany and compliance are licensed one by one, so a full scope quote adds up module by module. Ask both vendors to put the first-year total in writing, license plus services plus any module you would need in year two, and model it yourself with the accounting software ROI calculator before the renewal conversation rather than after it.
Rollout on FloQast: aimed at controllers rather than IT, so the project is usually owned inside accounting. On Trintech Cadency: enterprise implementation effort, with Trintech positioning Cadency for large, complex, public and global organizations and Adra for mid-enterprise teams. That is the difference that shows up in the project plan rather than in the demo.
Ownership differs more than effort does. FloQast is pitched at controllers, so the project usually sits inside accounting and moves at accounting's pace. Cadency is an enterprise implementation with the usual configuration, integration and testing phases, which buys rigour and costs calendar time.
Both connect broadly. Trintech lists SAP, Oracle, Dynamics, NetSuite and Workday for Cadency, and Adra adds a pre-built NetSuite connector and a Microsoft 365 embedded option for Dynamics. FloQast ties to the ERP trial balance. Ask each for a live demonstration on your ERP version. If matching volume is the real driver, the BlackLine and Cadency comparison is the sharper fight.
Plan the first close or first cycle after go-live before you sign. Write down who owns configuration changes, who answers an auditor's question about the records, and what happens to your data if you leave. Starting from a month-end close checklist makes those answers concrete instead of aspirational.
Use this FloQast vs Trintech Cadency comparison at the shortlist stage, before demos and vendor pitches narrow your options.
FloQast and Trintech Cadency usually make the shortlist for different reasons. Below we cover where each one fits the operating model, where the control differences start to matter, and what to test before procurement settles on one vendor by default.
FloQast wins when a controller owns the close and the SOX programme and wants both in one accounting-owned tool. Trintech Cadency wins when you are a large, public or global group where matching volume and audit evidence set the requirements. If both halves of that sound like you, the tie-breaker is which of the two limitations below you could live with for three years, because that is how long the contract will feel.
Do not let the enterprise framing decide this for you. Ask Trintech directly whether Cadency or Adra fits your profile, in writing, and treat the answer as the most useful piece of research in the evaluation. If it says Adra, FloQast and Numeric are your real comparison set.
The expensive mistake here is rarely picking the weaker product. It is picking the one whose assumptions about your team turn out to be wrong. For FloQast the risk is this: six quote-based packages make scoping slow, and the highest matching volumes are where buyers also look at enterprise platforms. For Trintech Cadency: planning is not among the modules, and a leaner team is the profile Trintech points at Adra instead. Both are survivable if you knew about them before signature and planned around them, and both are expensive to discover in month four.
FloQast is the easier choice for mid-market and enterprise controllers who own both the close and SOX. Pick it when the controller owns both the close and SOX and wants them in one place.
Against Trintech Cadency, its advantage is controllers who want the close and the SOX programme in one tool, with no per-user fee. SOX 404a and 404b packages next to the close, with AI agents that need human sign-off before anything posts.
The tradeoff: six quote-based packages make scoping slow, and the highest matching volumes are where buyers also look at enterprise platforms. Matching at the highest volumes is the capability that sends buyers back to the enterprise platforms. What else buyers compare with FloQast covers the rest of the field if this one is a dealbreaker.
Trintech Cadency is the easier choice for large, public or global accounting teams with strict audit evidence requirements. Pick it when public-company reporting and audit evidence set the requirements.
Against FloQast, its advantage is an audit-ready eBinder and matching built for public-company volumes. An eBinder that keeps close support audit-ready, plus matching built for enterprise volumes.
The tradeoff: planning is not among the modules, and a leaner team is the profile Trintech points at Adra instead. Trintech itself points mid-enterprise teams at Adra, so ask which product it thinks you are. What else buyers compare with Trintech Cadency covers the rest of the field if this one is a dealbreaker.
Settle these before the next call. Each one has a wrong answer that only shows up after signature, and each is cheap to ask now.
Ask Trintech in writing whether Cadency or Adra fits your profile. The answer reshapes the shortlist.
How many transactions do you match a month, and from how many sources?
Is the real problem SOX testing or matching volume? FloQast answers the first, Cadency the second.
Which FloQast packages are in year one and which in year two? Price both.
For Cadency, ask for the module list with the quote, since each one is licensed separately.
What does audit fieldwork cost in finance hours today? That is the number the eBinder has to beat.
Trintech sells financial close software. Cadency is its enterprise platform: reconciliations, high-volume matching, close management, journal entries, intercompany and compliance, with an online eBinder for auditors. Adra is its lighter suite for mid-enterprise teams on NetSuite or Microsoft Dynamics.
FloQast publishes no price, checked 25 September 2026. Its pricing page lists six packages behind Contact Sales and states there are no per-user fees, so headcount growth does not move the bill, but adding Reporting, consolidation or the AI agent packages does.
Cadency is Trintech's close platform for large, complex, public and global organizations. Its distinguishing feature is the online eBinder, which keeps close support in audit-ready form rather than in a folder somebody assembles later. Modules are licensed separately, so you pay for the benefit you scope.
Cadency runs the financial close: reconciling accounts, matching high transaction volumes, managing close tasks, posting and reviewing journal entries, handling intercompany and documenting compliance. Trintech lists connections to SAP, Oracle, Dynamics, NetSuite and Workday.
On a close shortlist FloQast sits against BlackLine and Trintech Cadency at the enterprise end, Numeric for NetSuite teams, and Trintech Adra in the mid-market. Where SOX is owned by internal audit rather than accounting, the comparison moves to a GRC platform instead.
Trintech positions Cadency for large, complex, public and global organizations and Adra for mid-enterprise teams. Adra covers Matcher, Balancer, Task Manager and Journal Entry, with a pre-built NetSuite connector and a Microsoft 365 embedded option for Dynamics. Ask the vendor which one it thinks you are.
Cadency includes a compliance module among its separately licensed modules. FloQast sells explicit SOX 404a and 404b packages next to the close. If a controller rather than internal audit is running SOX, FloQast's packaging is closer to how the work is owned in practice.
Neither publishes a figure. FloQast lists six packages behind Contact Sales and states no per-user fees. trintech.com/pricing returns a 404 and Cadency modules are licensed separately. Both checked 25 September 2026, so any dollar comparison for this pair is somebody's estimate rather than a vendor rate.
These questions are the ones Google was surfacing for this comparison on 15 October 2026, taken from a live People Also Ask check on the head-to-head query and both product names. Questions that turned out to be about a different company or a different meaning of the word were dropped rather than reworded, and the file behind this page records each one and why. This pair returned no measurable monthly search interest in either direction, so it was written after the pages with measured demand.
The full reviews go further on each product than a head-to-head can: <a href="/software/floqast/pricing">FloQast pricing in detail</a> and <a href="/software/trintech-cadency/pricing">Trintech Cadency pricing in detail</a> break the quote down line by line, and the alternatives pages cover what else sits in <a href="/categories/accounting-software">this category</a>.
Close management. Best fit: mid-market and enterprise controllers who own both the close and SOX. Weakest fit: a team whose matching volume has outgrown a checklist-led tool.
Enterprise close. Best fit: large, public or global accounting teams with strict audit evidence requirements. Weakest fit: a team leaner than a large enterprise, which Trintech itself routes to Adra.
