[CONTENT]
$
USD
Total Economic Impact
Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By FloQast
A FORRESTER TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY COMMISSIONED BY Floqast, JANUARY 2026
Total Economic Impact
A FORRESTER TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY COMMISSIONED BY Floqast, JANUARY 2026
Enterprises have invested heavily in ERPs, yet the actual validation of financial data remains fragmented across static spreadsheets, email threads, and shared drives. This disconnect creates a data latency gap where financial insights are delayed by weeks and a governance gap where audit risks accumulate in unmonitored spreadsheets. Finance leaders face a dual mandate: Accelerate the close to support real-time decision-making while enforcing stricter compliance controls, such as Sarbanes-Exley Act (SOX) requirements and internal audit controls, without increasing headcount.
The FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform is designed to support global enterprise accounting teams in managing their financial close, compliance, and reporting processes using AI-based capabilities. The unified platform consists of four solutions — Optimize the Close, Automate the Close, Connected Compliance, and Integrated Record-to-Report — and it connects to an ecosystem of integrations. FloQast Transform allows organizations to further automate workflows by building custom, no-code AI agents.
FloQast commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform on their organizations.
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed four decision-makers with experience using FloQast. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the experiences of the interviewees and combined the results into a single composite organization, which is a global, publicly traded enterprise organization with $2 billion in revenue and 5,000 employees.
Interviewees said that prior to using FloQast, their global organizations’ close processes relied on spreadsheets and email, which created inefficiencies, low confidence in data, and compliance risk. Close cycles exceeded 11 business days, accountability was limited, and regulatory control failures were common.
After deploying FloQast, these organizations automated workflows via AI and centralized data, which reduced manual effort for preparers and reviewers while accelerating close timelines. These organizations standardized processes that improved internal controls, reduced audit adjustments, and lowered external audit fees. Having faster, more accurate actuals allowed planning teams to deliver forecasts earlier, improving decision-making agility as enhanced visibility and accountability improved morale and freed time for high-value upskilling. These outcomes collectively decreased compliance risk and positioned finance teams as proactive partners to the businesses.
Quantified benefits. Three-year, risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
Cost reduction for report and documentation preparation. With FloQast, the composite’s preparers streamline the most time-consuming aspects of their work — monthly, quarterly, year-end close, variance analysis, and audit documentation — through automated workflows, structured processes, and clear accountability. The platform enables the preparers to shift their focus from tactical execution to strategic insight. Over three years, the composite saves $1.2 million in time savings.
Cost reduction for oversight activities and leadership communications. With FloQast, the composite’s reviewers accelerate their review processes through real-time visibility into report preparation status, centralized documentation, and easier identification of workflow bottlenecks. Over three years, this reduction saves the composite $429,000 in time savings.
Audit efficiency and cost savings. FloQast makes documentation readily accessible and improves the composite’s data accuracy, which saves the organization’s auditors time while auditing local offices, testing internal controls, and meeting with external auditors. Auditors spend less time on rework and communication with accountants. Additionally, because timeliness and completeness improve, the composite works to resolve its previous material weaknesses. This allows it to reduce its external audit fees, which were previously marked up as specialist involvement and long audit hours were required to address the weaknesses. Over three years, these efficiencies and cost savings save the composite $1.1 million.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
Upskilling and retaining accountants. By eliminating the need for manual, spreadsheet-based burdens and clarifying and automating processes, FloQast transforms the daily role of the composite’s accountants. This shift gives preparers and reviewers increased professional accountability and purpose while freeing time for them to focus on upskilling, professional development, and strategic analysis. These efforts ultimately improve morale and support accountant retention in an industry facing a talent shortage.
Accelerated downstream activities. As the close process becomes more efficient, the composite’s financial planning and analysis (FP&A) team receives actuals sooner and gains more confidence in the data provided.
Risk reduction from strategic regulatory guidance. FloQast standardizes the composite’s controls and increases its frequency of variance checks. This instills predictive internal controls while proactive guidance reduces the need for costly post-close adjustments, which secures the integrity of the organization’s financial filings and decreases the risk of regulatory fines.
Reduced dependence on IT. With a direct ERP integration, the composite organization handles the trial balance and chart of accounts sync, removing the accounting team’s dependence on IT for data loads. This streamlines data governance and frees up technical bandwidth.
Cross-functional collaboration. FloQast automates the composite’s communication and centralizes its documentation, so its accountants and auditors improve how they support and collaborate with one another, particularly during audit reviews.
Costs. Three-year, risk-adjusted PV costs for the composite organization include:
FloQast fees. The composite pays fees for the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform based on the number and types of solutions deployed. Over three years, this costs $600,000 for the composite.
Implementation and ongoing management. The composite pays an implementation fee of $85,000 to set up and configure the platform before use. The implementation lasts eight weeks, and each of the organization’s 100 FloQast users receives 2 hours of dedicated training during this period. On an ongoing basis, the composite dedicates 5 hours per month to platform optimization and meeting with FloQast to discuss additional features. Over three years, this costs the composite $134,000.
The financial analysis that is based on the interviews found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $2.8 million over three years versus costs of $735,000, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $2 million and an ROI of 275%.
Return on investment (ROI)
Benefits PV
Net present value (NPV)
Payback
FloQast AI And Agents
Forrester research states: “A significant gap exists between the executive desire for AI and the organization’s ability to execute. While a majority of CFOs see AI as a top investment priority for efficiency, few finance organizations have successfully implemented AI/machine leaning (ML) to date.”2 Interviewees shared sentiments around FloQast’s AI and agent capabilities:
The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “I’m of the philosophy that whatever we can do with tech, I would prefer to do that. When you think about the workforce and these accountants, is it going to change how they work? Absolutely. I don’t think people are going to be leaving in mass. If we transform the way that we process our data. It’s just going to help them upskill and redefine their roles.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization said: “A lot of the AI tools are more general. You have to figure out the use case yourself. I think the plus side is FloQast being an accountant-minded tool.”
The director of accounting at a software organization said: “The AI matching is a good ROI use case. We’re going to tell the CFO this. We have 35 bank accounts and three people reconciling cash. It’s a lot. Before, in the old ERP solution, there were limitations to where it basically took them until day five to finish and I think with the FloQast solution, we’re going to get them to like day two.”
The director of accounting in software said their organization completed a proof of concept with FloQast agents and shared the following about use case and projected efficiencies:
“My company is a very AI-forward company. We did the beta and the intensive full-day training with FloQast, and then we just had an offsite where everyone was required to come with a build idea. We spent 5 hours building [agents], and that’s going to be the expectation going forward. We want to see people build.”
“We’re leaning in. We just signed up for 20 agents. We have done one proof of concept build, and we’re working on our second. … The whole team currently spends 80 hours preparing accruals, and my colleagues and I spend about 30 hours reviewing them. I think the accrual automation agent is going to cut the prep time in half, and it’s going to cut my review time by 25%.”
| Role | Industry | Revenue | Employees |
|---|---|---|---|
| Director of accounting transformation | Consulting | $6B | 15,000 |
| Director of accounting | Software | $2B | 8,000 |
| US controller | Software | $170M | 630 |
| Manager of accounting | Software | $600M | 750 |
Forrester research states: “Many F&A processes are fraught with unnecessary variation. Extra process steps, offline behavior, rogue spreadsheets, and personal shortcuts are common.”3
Interviewees explained that prior to using FloQast, their organizations’ accounting processes were complex and required managing multiple entities, currencies, and hundreds of monthly reconciliations across hundreds of accounts. The organizations also relied heavily on manual, spreadsheet-driven processes for monthly, quarterly, and year-end close. ERP data was downloaded and manually incorporated into spreadsheets, creating a shadow IT environment prone to errors and governance failures — a challenge that aligns with Forrester research about the need for integrated, modern FP&A platforms.4 These fragmented workflows resulted in inconsistent processes, lack of visibility, and low confidence in data accuracy, which ultimately increased compliance risk and delayed FP&A’s ability to deliver timely insights. Interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:
Inconsistent, time-consuming, and manual processes. Interviewees explained their organizations’ accounting teams lacked consistent and structured close processes. Preparers often tracked data independently and reviewers often had different standards of approvals, which proved particularly chaotic and time-consuming as these organizations scaled in size and complexity.
The US controller at a software organization said: “Before FloQast, it was pretty bad. We had at least a dozen different close spreadsheets. Each country had one, and then our revenue team had one. They were all tracking independently.”
The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said, “Before, our processes relied heavily on the manual labor of our teams to complete manual checklists and data dumping download from the old ERP system into spreadsheets.”
Lack of visibility and accountability. Interviewees explained that without a centralized, up-to-date system to access data and a trackable communication system, their organizations lacked the ability to hold accountants accountable and ensure the completion of critical steps — like monthly reconciliations. The US controller at a software organization said: “The close process was a mess. It took at least 15 business days to close and, at year end, [it took] even a little bit more than that. To be honest, there was just zero visibility with all the spreadsheets. With the global nature and the size of the company, there was no way to ever know beyond just someone on a phone call telling you that everything’s okay — whether that was actually the case or not.”
The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “Some accountants hadn’t done a reconciliation for account for years because either the balance was minimal or they figured it didn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. But from our perspective, every single account that we have a balance in needs to be reconciled.”
The same interviewee continued: “To get insight into our local offices, it was like sending an email into the world and hoping that someone was going to respond to our email rather than ignore it. Now they can’t ignore it.”
Low confidence in data accuracy. Interviewees explained that aside from added manual effort, the spreadsheet-based way of tracking and reporting data was often error-prone and that it was difficult to manage changes or amendments. This did not inspire confidence with their organizations’ accounting leadership. The director of accounting at a software organization said: “Everything was in a spreadsheet. It was pretty ugly. It was very chaotic with rows deleted or missing. The confidence level that everything was being reconciled from a completeness level — that we were catching every account and that it was actually, truly reconciling — was very low.”
Regulatory filing and control issues. Some of the interviewees explained their organizations had lengthy close timelines due to the key issues highlighted above — most notably, inconsistent process and lack of accountability. This led to significant regulatory filing issues for one organization and raised internal control issues during audits at others. The US controller at a software organization said: “My organization had a lot of issues with SEC filings and actually missed filing a 10-K [form] and a number of 10-Q [forms]. We were behind probably a year and a half on filings when I started, and they had just caught up shortly thereafter. … [Additionally,] every quarter we were doing the variance analysis for the auditors. The team had been dumping reports at our ERP and then manually assigning and trying to fill it out. It was a SOX control, and we were failing it all the time because we’d miss one or two things on an enormous spreadsheet.”
The interviewees searched for a solution that could:
Reduce risk and improve audit readiness by enabling consistent, transparent close and reconciliation processes.
Scale with global, expanding operations without introducing complexity, additional headcount, or compliance gaps.
Streamline and automate accountant tasks to free accountants for higher-value analysis and decision support.
Enhance collaboration between accounting and audit teams through centralized workflows and real-time visibility.
Support IPO readiness and post-IPO regulatory compliance by enforcing controls and documentation standards.
Deliver reliable and accurate data by unifying disparate ERP sources and automating critical accounting workflows that minimizes human error.
After a request for proposal (RFP) and business case process evaluating multiple vendors, the interviewees’ organizations chose the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform and began deployment. Interviewees shared the following reasons as to why they ultimately selected FloQast:
Tech architecture and user experience. The director of accounting at a software organization said: “We did an RFP with other solutions to weigh the options. We listened to what they had to say, and FloQast was by far the better solution. [For one competitor,] the user interface and the way they had architected their solution was not as good because you had to store a lot of the documentation support in their solution. FloQast explained that it just integrates with where we already keep our files. The tech architecture made way more sense with FloQast, and the user interface was better.”
Solution flexibility. Forrester research states: “A new system won’t fix underlying process problems or a misaligned organizational structure on its own. Instead it often digitizes existing dysfunction, creating user friction and resistance to change. Therefore, it’s critical to ensure that the tool’s underlying design principles are in harmony with the organization’s strategy vision.”5
The director of accounting at a software organization said: “All of our accounting team is stateside, but we have 15 subsidiaries, and one person is doing one area for all 15 subsidiaries. The way FloQast is structured allows us to reconcile to one file as opposed to having to copy and paste 15 files into 15 different folders. The team didn’t have to change the way we reconcile just to fit in with FloQast, which was a big deal.”
Prior experience. Two of the interviewees said there were colleagues at their organizations who used FloQast at previous employers with successful outcomes. The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “We evaluated a few options and decided to go with FloQast because we also had someone who had joined within the finance department who had utilized FloQast at another company. They really harped on the benefits.”
Based on the interviews, Forrester constructed a TEI framework, a composite company, and an ROI analysis that illustrates the areas financially affected. The composite organization is representative of the interviewees’ organizations, and it is used to present the aggregate financial analysis in the next section. The composite organization has the following characteristics:
Description of composite. The global, $2 billion dollar, publicly traded organization has 5,000 employees, 95 accountants, and five internal auditors.
Deployment characteristics. The composite organization deploys all of the FloQast solutions (Optimize the Close, Automate the Close, Connected Compliance, and Record-To-Report). It uses FloQast for its monthly, quarterly, and year-end close processes and for its required annual filings. The composite uses FloHub Connector to integrate FloQast with single-sign-on (SSO), ERP, and content management systems.
$2 billion
5,000 employees
95 accountants
5 internal auditors
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Cost reduction for report and documentation preparation | $418,568 | $502,281 | $558,090 | $1,478,939 | $1,214,925 |
| Btr | Cost reduction for oversight activities and leadership communication | $141,804 | $170,165 | $212,706 | $524,675 | $429,354 |
| Ctr | Audit efficiency and cost savings | $446,722 | $446,722 | $446,722 | $1,340,166 | $1,110,931 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $1,007,094 | $1,119,167 | $1,217,518 | $3,343,778 | $2,755,210 |
Evidence and data. Forrester research states: “Technology is a catalyst, but your people drive the transformation.”6 Interviewees explained that their organizations’ preparers were responsible for monthly, quarterly and year-end close, variance analysis, and audit documentation preparation. But they said with FloQast, their organizations standardized and automated their close process and gained the ability to hold preparers accountable for specific tasks. Preparers gained efficiency across their day-to-day responsibilities through FloQast features including to-do lists, ReMind tool, automated reconciliations, tracking tool, and data integrations.
The director of accounting transformation in consulting said four FloQast features created efficiencies for their preparers:
The director of accounting in software shared their organization’s initial business case for preparers. They said the case materialized in the first year and that they expect growth in future years. They explained: “At the time, we had 15 preparers, and I said we were going to save 4 hours per preparer per month. Prior to FloQast, preparers had to manually pull trial balances into their reconciliations to prove that it reconciled. Our ERP and content management integrations were going to save each preparer 2 hours a month. We adopted the ReMind tool, which sent out automated emails and estimated an hour of savings per preparer. I said there was another hour saved from redundant communication with the reviewer.”
The US controller at a software organization said: “We definitely saved at least three or four business days off a close. The other part that’s harder to quantify is that things are just more efficient. The amount of time anybody spends in a given day may have decreased, but it has also probably been replaced with better value-add activities. So, our numbers are much more accurate, and that’s especially true on the reconciliations.”
The same interviewee continued: “Every quarter, we’re doing variance analysis for our auditors. The team had been manually assigning and trying to fill out enormous spreadsheets. Our thresholds were also way off. The variance analysis [within FloQast] helped with that and with AI around it further. We are at a point where it takes us a day to do it versus a week and [the time of] 12 people. It was just another thing on the back end of the quarter close that was wasting a lot of time.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization estimated preparers gained between 10% and 20% efficiency. They said: “When I started, close was about 12 days, and now we’re at five days. A lot of that is pretty much directly tied to a FloQast checklist or reconciliation. FloQast has allowed us visibility into close, understanding where we slow down to move up deadlines and hold people accountable for items when it comes to the close account reconciliations. We can utilize the tools that FloQast has — whether it’s a fixed-balance sign-off, automated reconciliation features for our prepayment, or rolling schedules that get saved in the FloQast tool.”
Modeling and assumptions. For the financial analysis as applied to the composite organization, Forrester assumes:
There are 75 preparers who dedicate 50% of their time (1,040 hours annually) to accounting tasks. These tasks include monthly, quarterly, and year-end close processes, variance analysis, and audit doc preparations.
With FloQast, each preparer improves their efficiency for accounting tasks by 15% in Year 1, 18% in Year 3, and 20% in Year 3.
The average fully burdened annual salary for a staff accountant is $110,000. The hourly rate is $53.
Because not all time is spent on productive activities, 75% of the recaptured time is spent productively.
Risks. This benefit may vary among organizations depending on:
Number of preparers and their skill levels.
Amount of preparer time dedicated to accounting tasks versus project work that does not require FloQast.
Complexity of the accounting organization, including the number of entities and accounts to be reconciled.
Annual salaries of preparers.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $1.2 million.
Efficiency gains for preparers by Year 3
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Preparers | Composite | 75 | 75 | 75 | |
| A2 | Time each preparer spent on accounting tasks (non-project work) prior to FloQast (hours) | Composite | 1,040 | 1,040 | 1,040 | |
| A3 | Efficiency gain with FloQast | Interviews | 15% | 18% | 20% | |
| A4 | Cumulative time saved on tasks with FloQast (hours) | A1*A2*A3 | 11,700 | 14,040 | 15,600 | |
| A5 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for a staff accountant | Composite | $53 | $53 | $53 | |
| A6 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 75% | 75% | 75% | |
| At | Cost reduction for report and documentation preparation | A4*A5*A6 | $465,075 | $558,090 | $620,100 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Atr | Cost reduction for report and documentation preparation (risk-adjusted) | $418,568 | $502,281 | $558,090 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,478,939 | Three-year present value: $1,214,925 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees explained that their organizations’ reviewers were responsible for performing oversight of preparers’ tasks and for liaising with various audit and leadership teams. As preparers’ accountability and overall visibility into close processes improved, reviewers spent less time in daily team meetings and in direct communication with preparers following up on tasks. FloQast centralized preparers’ data in a clear and accessible format. Interviewees explained how particular features (e.g., dashboards, review notes, bulk edit permissions, the ability to quickly export data) improved efficiency for reviewers.
The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “We now have a much better way of maintaining data. FloQast allows me to understand [if tasks] are overdue, which allows me to drop a note to help the process along. Before, we had files that were all over the place, and sometimes [a preparer would] save something to their personal files and send it via email.”
The director of accounting in software described efficiency gains for reviewers tied to reduced oversight and fewer manual status checks: “It was five reviewers with four hours saved per reviewer. Reviewers wouldn’t have to monitor the spreadsheets as FloQast notifies in real time. The review note feature is very nice, so I don’t have to go back and forth with folks. I no longer have to manually tick and tie in account recs as I know that the integration is working. If FloQast tells me it reconciles, it reconciles. We adopted the fluctuation tool because people were pulling the flux multiple times a close as entries got booked. We used to have a lot of closed-status meetings daily, and those just went away. The dashboard is helpful as I can see who’s on track and who’s falling behind. FloQast does a really nice job of making bulk changes very easily, so I spent less time making sure the close checklist was up to date for any new subsidiaries and change in responsibilities. If someone is on vacation for a month or two, I can swap them out for someone else. If we’re moving responsibilities around, it’s very seamless.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization said: “I think these time savings are likely similar [in the] 10% to 20% range. As a reviewer myself, I can leave my review comments and track the review comments really easily. The dashboard gives a high-level sense of where we are during the close or with reconciliations. I can easily screenshot and provide an update to my chief accounting officer. A lot of the improvements we’ve seen are because it helps keep reviewers organized.”
Modeling and assumptions. For the financial analysis as applied to the composite organization, Forrester assumes:
There are 20 reviewers who dedicate 50% of their time (1,040 hours annually) to accounting tasks. These tasks include oversight and review of preparers tasks and liaising with audit and leadership teams.
With FloQast, each reviewer improves their efficiency for accounting tasks by 10% in Year 1, 12% in Year 3, and 15% in Year 3.
The average fully burdened annual salary for an accounting manager is $210,000. The hourly rate is $101.
Because not all time is spent on productive activities, 75% of the recaptured time is spent productively.
Risks. This benefit may vary among organizations depending on:
Number of reviewers and their skill levels.
Amount of reviewer time dedicated to accounting tasks versus project work that does not require FloQast.
Complexity of the accounting organization, including the number of entities and accounts to be reconciled.
Annual salaries of reviewers.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $429,000.
Efficiency gains for reviewers by Year 3
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | Reviewers | Composite | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| B2 | Time each reviewer spent reviewing preparers work prior to FloQast (hours) | Composite | 1,040 | 1,040 | 1,040 | |
| B3 | Efficiency gain with FloQast | Interviews | 10% | 12% | 15% | |
| B4 | Cumulative time saved on tasks with FloQast (hours) | B1*B2*B3 | 2,080 | 2,496 | 3,120 | |
| B5 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for an accounting manager | Composite | $101 | $101 | $101 | |
| B6 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 75% | 75% | 75% | |
| Bt | Cost reduction for oversight activities and leadership communications | B4*B5*B6 | $157,560 | $189,072 | $236,340 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Btr | Cost reduction for oversight activities and leadership communications (risk-adjusted) | $141,804 | $170,165 | $212,706 | ||
| Three-year total: $524,675 | Three-year present value: $429,354 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees explained their organizations’ internal auditors spent time on tasks such as auditing local offices, SOX control testing, meeting with external auditors, and ensuring accuracy across legal filings. With FloQast, communications with preparers and reviewers improved as documentation — most notably, evidence requests — became accessible, accurate and marked with timestamps and notes. Auditors spent less time chasing accountants and sorting through spreadsheets to complete their responsibilities. Additionally, as data accuracy improved, auditors spent less time managing post-close adjustments. One interviewee explained that overall data accuracy, completeness, and timeliness improved using FloQast, which led to significant cost savings in their organization’s external audit fees.
The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization provided two use cases:
The director of accounting at a software organization said: “Prior to FloQast we had an audit board task for every single account. It was a lot of tasks. Once we talked [the internal audit team] through how FloQast works, we were able to get rid of all these tasks. We consolidated it into one task that someone under me owns. Now, when FloQast is fully closed 100%, we run a reconciliation report that has documentation of the preparer, the reviewer, and sign-off. We have the completeness report that proves out that we’re not missing any accounts.”
The US controller a software organization said: “I would say [internal auditors spend] 25% of their time in FloQast. It’s a fair amount. They’re constantly going through evidence requests, creating new ones, reviewing them in FloQast, and passing them off to the external auditors to review. They spend early part of the year working through the flowcharts and narratives that are in the system, the walkthroughs, and then a little bit of time just on overall control matrix maintenance.”
The same interviewee said: “Part of what can kill a quarter-end close is [when] you close the books and then two weeks later, we uncover five more errors that we need to book, rerun everything, and [when] auditors find it, there are issues there. It’s probably been at least three quarters now in a row that we’ve had virtually zero post-close adjustments. …That allows the SEC filing and the audit to take its normal course.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization said: “From our perspective on time savings, it’s easy for us to know exactly where to go and where to pull support from. We just completed the internal controls walk-through session with a bunch of our internal auditors and their requests are evidence of review or evidence of preparer, reviewer, and segregation of duties. … There are usually two major testing periods for controls annually, and it is around 15 hours for each session of testing. [With FloQast,] the auditors can pull the controls documentation quicker, and they can digest and follow it on their own. It is audit-friendly.”
The US controller in software said their organization had many problems around SEC filings: “With the SEC filing issues also came SOX issues. That’s where the pitch for FloQast’s compliance solution came in. … The external auditors were taking us to the cleaners on fees because there were a lot of material weaknesses. They charged for remediation efforts. FloQast definitely helped to remediate some of the controls in and of itself. … The auditors trust and have reliance on FloQast and our ERP. Fees have come down, time has come down, and trust has gone up. We’ve also started to challenge the level of effort in some of our controls to help simplify. Our variance analysis thresholds were around 100,000 before, and now they’re 500,000. Audit fees have come down about a third. It’s a significant dollar amount. I’m hoping we can negotiate even further down next year.”
Modeling and assumptions. For the financial analysis as applied to the composite organization, Forrester assumes:
There are five internal auditors who dedicate 30% of their time (624 hours annually) to financial audit tasks. These tasks include auditing local offices, SOX control testing, communicating with external auditors and creating workflows for legal filings.
With FloQast, each of these auditors gains 15% efficiency on their tasks.
The average fully burdened annual salary for an internal auditor is $110,000. The hourly rate is $53.
Because not all time is spent on productive activities, 50% of the recaptured work is spent productively.
The composite has revenues of $2 billion.
Annually, the composite pays 0.07% of its revenue on external audit fees.
Due to past material weaknesses, the composite has a 30% markup on its external audit fees.
FloQast reduces the composite’s external audit fees by 30% annually.
Risks. This benefit may vary among organizations depending on:
Number of internal auditors and their skill levels.
Amount of reviewer time dedicated to financial audit tasks involving FloQast.
Complexity of the accounting organization, including the number of entities and accounts to be reconciled.
The annual salaries of internal auditors.
Cost of external audit fees prior to FloQast.
Whether or not the organization has encountered a material weakness and whether or not a percentage markup is applicable.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 20%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $1.1 million.
Efficiency gains for internal auditors by Year 3
Cost savings on external audit fees
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Internal auditors | Composite | 5 | 5 | 5 | |
| C2 | Time each auditor spent on financial audit tasks prior to FloQast (hours) | Composite | 624 | 624 | 624 | |
| C3 | Efficiency gain with FloQast | Interviews | 15% | 15% | 15% | |
| C4 | Cumulative time saved on tasks with FloQast (hours) | C1*C2*C3 | 468 | 468 | 468 | |
| C5 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for an internal auditor | Composite | $53 | $53 | $53 | |
| C6 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| C7 | Subtotal: Internal audit efficiency | C4*C5*C6 | $12,402 | $12,402 | $12,402 | |
| C8 | Revenue | Composite | $2,000,000,000 | $2,000,000,000 | $2,000,000,000 | |
| C9 | External audit fees as a percentage of revenue | Composite | 0.07% | 0.07% | 0.07% | |
| C10 | Percentage markup due to material weakness | Composite | 30% | 30% | 30% | |
| C11 | External audit fees prior to FloQast | C8*(C9*(1+C10)) | $1,820,000 | $1,820,000 | $1,820,000 | |
| C12 | Percentage of fees saved with FloQast | Interviews | 30% | 30% | 30% | |
| C13 | Subtotal: External audit cost savings | C11*C12 | $546,000 | $546,000 | $546,000 | |
| Ct | Audit efficiency and cost savings | C7 + C13 | $558,402 | $558,402 | $558,402 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓20% | |||||
| Ctr | Audit efficiency and cost savings (risk-adjusted) | $446,722 | $446,722 | $446,722 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,340,165 | Three-year present value: $1,110,931 | |||||
Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:
Upskilling and retaining accountants. Interviewees explained that with the time saved through FloQast’s automation features, their organizations’ accountants transformed their roles and spent more time developing their skills around critical analysis and decision-making. This led to enhanced accountability and improved morale, which ultimately supported retention efforts. The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said, “It is upskilling, and now they’re able to actually take a step back to use a little bit more critical thinking to apply within the accounts.”
The US controller at a software organization said: “A lot of the accountants’ lives have generally improved, and people feel better and happier in general. The morale is a lot better, which you can’t really measure. A lot of people did leave during the SEC issues, and then we rehired and re-staffed and then started to implement solutions like FloQast. I think it’s made it easy to maintain and keep [the accountants].”
Accelerated downstream activities. Interviewees said that with a more efficient close process, their organizations now deliver actuals earlier to FP&A, which allows FP&A to utilize the data for decision-making sooner. The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “Let’s say it was around day eight that [FP&A] used to send that information to the executive team. Now it’s by usually day six, sometimes rolling into day seven. [Saving] two days is great, as it has increased the quickness in which they receive the information and what they can do on their end to deliver that.”
The director of accounting at a consulting organization said: “The flux tool really helps on that day six afternoon to find and resolve [discrepancies] quicker. That leads to a better, more accurate product to FP&A. Since we’ve implemented FloQast, the number of questions or feedback that they have for us on day seven has dropped. That’s ultimately just because we’re getting more accurate numbers to them on day six.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization said: “Overall, because it has enabled us to kind of be more efficient with our close, it directly impacts in providing financials quicker to management and CFO while our FP&A team is able to get out their management reporting earlier.”
Risk reduction from strategic regulatory guidance. Interviewees said FloQast helped standardize controls and increased the frequency of variance checks, which reduced the risk of incurring a regulatory fine because FloQast helped standardize controls and increase the frequency of variance checks. Interviewees also mentioned the reduction in post-close adjustments. The US controller at a software organization said: “There’s virtually no chance of [incurring a regulatory fine] today. … There is significant risk reduction overall.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization said: “I think accuracy has definitely changed. Prior to FloQast, we had an issue with even getting all accounts reconciled. FloQast helped us mitigate a previous deficiency we had when it comes to SOX controls. Before, it was up to reviewer’s discretion. But now we are able to set a universal threshold before sign-off. We have set our threshold at a really low dollar amount.”
Reduced dependence on IT. Interviewees said that through ERP integrations, their organizations’ accountants spend less time interfacing with IT for data-loading activities. The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “With the direct connect for the trial balance and the chart of accounts, it has saved a bunch of time from IT’s perspective. They no longer need to be responsible for downloading data and dropping it into the SFTP (secure file transfer portal). They only needed to set up the API and ensure it continues to work.”
Cross-functional collaboration. Interviewees explained how communication and daily workflows, especially during audit reviews, improved for accountants and auditors as FloQast centralized documentation and automated tasks and reminders.
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
Supporting IPO preparation. The manager of accounting in software said their organization was preparing for an IPO and mentioned that as one of the reasons it invested in FloQast: ‘When it comes to looking towards an IPO, SOX compliance and audit support is all in one spot, and the expectations are very clear when it comes to FloQast — sign-offs, preparer, reviewer, and all those steps. This helps to support our work towards an IPO.”
Using more FloQast integrations. Aside from connecting to existing ERP and content management platforms, interviewees expressed desire to connect FloQast with additional software across their organizations. The manager of accounting at a software organization shared: “We have been discussing some of the newer integrations they’ve been rolling out. For us specifically, this is payroll, HR, and our company credit card management.”
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dtr | FloQast fees | $0 | $228,250 | $241,945 | $256,462 | $726,657 | $600,138 |
| Etr | Implementation and ongoing management | $124,872 | $3,816 | $3,816 | $3,816 | $136,320 | $134,362 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $124,872 | $232,066 | $245,761 | $260,278 | $862,977 | $734,500 |
Evidence and data. Interviewees explained said their organizations pay fees to FloQast based on the number and type of solutions deployed. Pricing is customized based on the needs of the business and solution package. Contact FloQast for more details.
Modeling and assumptions. For the financial analysis as applied to the composite organization, Forrester assumes:
The composite deploys all four FloQast solutions (e.g., Optimize the Close, Automate the Close, Connected Compliance, Record-to-Report) beginning in Year 1.
Risks. This cost may vary among organizations depending on:
Number and type of solutions deployed.
Complexity of the organization, including the number of employees, currencies, entities, and monthly reconciliations.
Any negotiated discounts.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $600,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | FloQast fees | FloQast | $0 | $207,500 | $219,950 | $233,147 |
| Dt | FloQast fees | D1 | $0 | $207,500 | $219,950 | $233,147 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Dtr | FloQast fees (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $228,250 | $241,945 | $256,462 | |
| Three-year total: $726,657 | Three-year present value: $600,138 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees explained that implementation lasted a few months for their organizations and included structuring overall platform layouts, folders, and templates and defining their checklists. Users required minimal training to begin realizing value. On an ongoing basis, these organizations manage their user bases, iterate on their checklists and various templates, and meet with FloQast to discuss platform optimization.
The director of accounting transformation at a consulting organization said: “[For implementation,] we started with teams responsible for reviewing and ensuring the reconciliations and monthly checklists are done and accurate, and our teams that prepare the majority of the reconciliations and data. Then we did a rollout to EMEA and APAC. … It took two to three of months to structure FloQast [regarding] folders, policies, and procedures, and [create] the checklist and ask, ‘How’s this going to best fit for us?’ Within the fourth month, teams were using the platform.”
The director of accounting at a software organization said: “The upload template is simple. [But first,] we had to scrub a lot of our spreadsheets. We spent about two months talking with the team about how we wanted to architect and structure it. What checklist items do we actually want in the tool? How do we want to structure the reconciliation folders? I was leading that charge, but the whole team was involved.”
The US controller at a software organization said: “I did a lot of up-front work with the template. Our implementation partner took all of our checklists and did the heavy lift to set up a template. Once the whole template was set up, I could more easily go through and sort and validate the data. The actual work on my part is maybe a handful of hours over a couple weeks. We would go [back and forth] with the implementation partner.”
The manager of accounting at a software organization said: “The FloQast team spent an hour of formal training to walk through all of the capabilities and steps. I found it to be very intuitive. It’s very easy to make your own changes, and I didn’t need a lot of background changes. Since then, I’ve had various ad hoc sessions — let’s say a 30-minute session every six months when new features are rolled out or if we run into some issues [we need to resolve]. I also [often reference] the FloQast Academy and help documents and help pages.”
Modeling and assumptions. For the financial analysis as applied to the composite organization, Forrester assumes:
The composite pays an initial implementation fee of $85,000.
Implementation lasts eight weeks, during which a staff accountant is burdened 50% of the time.
All 100 users of the platform receive 2 hours of training.
On an ongoing basis, a staff accountant dedicates 5 hours per month to administration and platform optimization.
Risks. This cost may vary among organizations depending on:
Size and complexity of the organization.
Existing state of accounting operations.
Number and types of solutions deployed.
Type of implementation partner involved.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 20%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $134,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Implementation fee | FloQast | $85,000 | |||
| E2 | Implementation time (weeks) | Interviews | 8 | |||
| E3 | FTEs involved in implementation | Composite | 0.5 | |||
| E4 | Average fully burdened weekly salary for a staff accountant | Composite | $2,115 | |||
| E5 | Users trained | Composite | 100 | |||
| E6 | Training time per user (hours) | Interviews | 2 | |||
| E7 | Ongoing management time (hours) | Interviews | 0 | 60 | 60 | 60 |
| E8 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for a staff accountant | A5 | $53 | $53 | $53 | $53 |
| Et | Implementation and ongoing management | E1+(E2*E3*E4)+E5*E6*E8)+(E7*E8) | $104,060 | $3,180 | $3,180 | $3,180 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑20% | |||||
| Etr | Implementation and ongoing management (risk-adjusted) | $124,872 | $3,816 | $3,816 | $3,816 | |
| Three-year total: $136,320 | Three-year present value: $134,362 | |||||
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | ($124,872) | ($232,066) | ($245,761) | ($260,278) | ($862,977) | ($734,500) |
| Total benefits | $0 | $1,007,093 | $1,119,167 | $1,217,518 | $3,343,778 | $2,755,210 |
| Net benefits | ($124,872) | $775,027 | $873,406 | $957,240 | $2,480,801 | $2,020,710 |
| ROI | 275% | |||||
| Payback | <6 months |
The financial results calculated in the Benefits and Costs sections can be used to determine the ROI, NPV, and payback period for the composite organization’s investment. Forrester assumes a yearly discount rate of 10% for this analysis.
These risk-adjusted ROI, NPV, and payback period values are determined by applying risk-adjustment factors to the unadjusted results in each Benefit and Cost section.
The initial investment column contains costs incurred at “time 0” or at the beginning of Year 1 that are not discounted. All other cash flows are discounted using the discount rate at the end of the year. PV calculations are calculated for each total cost and benefit estimate. NPV calculations in the summary tables are the sum of the initial investment and the discounted cash flows in each year. Sums and present value calculations of the Total Benefits, Total Costs, and Cash Flow tables may not exactly add up, as some rounding may occur.
From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment in the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform.
The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform can have on an organization.
Interviewed FloQast stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform.
Interviewed four decision-makers at organizations using the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.
Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewees’ organizations.
Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the interviewees.
Employed four fundamental elements of TEI in modeling the investment impact: benefits, costs, flexibility, and risks. Given the increasing sophistication of ROI analyses related to IT investments, Forrester’s TEI methodology provides a complete picture of the total economic impact of purchase decisions. Please see Appendix A for additional information on the TEI methodology.
Benefits represent the value the solution delivers to the business. The TEI methodology places equal weight on the measure of benefits and costs, allowing for a full examination of the solution’s effect on the entire organization.
Costs comprise all expenses necessary to deliver the proposed value, or benefits, of the solution. The methodology captures implementation and ongoing costs associated with the solution.
Flexibility represents the strategic value that can be obtained for some future additional investment building on top of the initial investment already made. The ability to capture that benefit has a PV that can be estimated.
Risks measure the uncertainty of benefit and cost estimates given: 1) the likelihood that estimates will meet original projections and 2) the likelihood that estimates will be tracked over time. TEI risk factors are based on “triangular distribution.”
The present or current value of (discounted) cost and benefit estimates given at an interest rate (the discount rate). The PV of costs and benefits feed into the total NPV of cash flows.
The present or current value of (discounted) future net cash flows given an interest rate (the discount rate). A positive project NPV normally indicates that the investment should be made unless other projects have higher NPVs.
A project’s expected return in percentage terms. ROI is calculated by dividing net benefits (benefits less costs) by costs.
The interest rate used in cash flow analysis to take into account the time value of money. Organizations typically use discount rates between 8% and 16%.
The breakeven point for an investment. This is the point in time at which net benefits (benefits minus costs) equal initial investment or cost.
Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.
Related Forrester Research
AI Agents: Ready For Enterprises, And Moving Toward Autonomy, Forrester Research, Inc., July 8, 2025.
1 Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.
2 Source: The Finance Planning And Analysis Transformation Imperative, Forrester Research, Inc., September 5, 2025.
3 Source: AI In Finance And Accounting – Wide-Eyed But Hopeful, Forrester Research, Jan 10, 2022.
4 Source: The Finance Planning And Analytics Transformation Imperative, Forrester Research, Sept 05, 2025.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by FloQast and delivered by Forrester Consulting. It is not meant to be used as a competitive analysis.
Forrester makes no assumptions as to the potential ROI that other organizations will receive. Forrester strongly advises that readers use their own estimates within the framework provided in the study to determine the appropriateness of an investment in the FloQast Accounting Transformation Platform.
FloQast reviewed and provided feedback to Forrester, but Forrester maintains editorial control over the study and its findings and does not accept changes to the study that contradict Forrester’s findings or obscure the meaning of the study.
Floqast provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Sarah Lervold
January 2026
ABOUT FORRESTER CONSULTING
Forrester provides independent and objective research-based consulting to help leaders deliver key transformation outcomes. Fueled by our customer-obsessed research, Forrester’s seasoned consultants partner with leaders to execute on their priorities using a unique engagement model that tailors to diverse needs and ensures lasting impact. For more information, visit forrester.com/consulting.
© Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited. Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change. Forrester®, Technographics®, Forrester Wave, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks of Forrester Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies.
https://mainstayadvisor.com/go/mainstay/gdpr/policy.html
PDF