Occurly and Maxio
Teams comparing Occurly with Maxio (Chargify and SaaSOptics) want billing and revenue analytics on one platform instead of two products kept in step.
written for people who already use it
Side by side
Two approaches, stated plainly.
Not a scorecard. Both columns describe how each platform chooses to solve the job, including where Maxio goes further than Occurly does today.
| The job | Maxio | Occurly |
|---|---|---|
| Product shape | Billing and analytics as two products brought together, each strong in its own right. | One platform, so the analytics read the data that produced the invoice. |
| Revenue recognition | Deep GAAP revenue recognition, and currently the more mature of the two. | Revenue reporting and warehouse sync, with recognition workflows still being built out. |
| Usage-based pricing | Supported, with the model rooted in contract and subscription billing. | High-throughput metering, credits and commitments as a primary pricing model. |
| Operating surface | Two systems to configure, reconcile and keep aligned as pricing changes. | One catalog change, and billing and reporting move together. |
Why teams look at Occurly
Usually when pricing gets hybrid, or a second entity appears.
The evaluations that end in a move tend to start with the same four requirements.
- Billing and analytics on one product rather than two kept in sync
- Native usage-based billing rather than an adapted subscription model
- Real-time MRR, churn and retention from the live billing record
- Guided migration and onboarding across both halves at once
Migration
Moving without skipping a cycle.
Because Maxio is two products, migrations import from both sides: the billing catalog and subscriptions from one, the historical financial record from the other. We reconcile the two against each other before cutover, which is often the first time they have been checked line by line.
- Week one
We map what you have.
Your catalog, entities, currencies and contract structures, against how they would be modelled in Occurly. You get the map whether or not you go ahead, including anything that has no clean equivalent.
- Weeks two and three
Everything imports into a sandbox.
Plans, customers, subscriptions and invoice history load into an environment that mirrors production. We run parallel cycles against it and reconcile them line by line with your current system.
- Cutover
One cycle boundary, and you are on.
The switch happens on a cycle boundary, not mid-period. Payment methods stay with your existing processor, so no customer is asked to re-enter a card and no invoice is missed.
What comes across
Nothing is left behind on purpose.
The parts of a migration that go wrong are almost always the unglamorous ones: open receivables, part payments and the invoice history reporting depends on. Those are the parts we reconcile first.
- Plans, add-ons and price points import as a catalog
- Customers, subscriptions and their full history come across
- Historical invoices import, so reporting stays continuous
- Open receivables and part payments are reconciled before cutover
- Payment methods stay with your processor, untouched
- Parallel cycles run until the numbers agree
FAQ
Moving from Maxio
We rely on GAAP revenue recognition. Is Occurly ready?
Occurly gives you revenue reporting and warehouse sync from live billing data, and revenue recognition workflows are still being built out. If audited GAAP recognition is your primary requirement today, Maxio is the more mature answer and we will tell you that on the call.
Do our SaaS metrics change when we move?
The definitions are yours to set, and the underlying data is the billing record rather than a periodic sync, so figures are computed the same way every time. We reconcile the first three months against your existing reporting before you rely on it.
Bring us your current setup.
We will map it against Occurly and tell you what a move would take, in writing, including the parts that would not be an improvement.
Other comparisons