NetSuite vs Zoho: The Comparison a US Operator Cannot Make Yet, and the Four Things You Can Compare Today.
Updated: 3 days ago
A NetSuite customer whose renewal letter has just arrived asks a reasonable question: is Zoho a real alternative for us? The honest answer begins with something most comparison pages leave out. The two things are not the same shape, and the part of Zoho that would make them the same shape is not something a US operator can buy today.
That does not make the question unanswerable. It makes it four questions instead of one. This post says which comparison you cannot make yet, and then makes the four you can.
The comparison you cannot make yet.
NetSuite is one suite: financials, inventory, order management, CRM, projects, billing and reporting on one data model, sold as one product with one renewal. Zoho sells the same functions as a set of applications, Books, Inventory, CRM, Projects, Desk, Analytics and Creator among them, that share sign-on and a great deal of integration but are not one product on one data model.
Zoho also has an ERP product, built to be the single-suite answer, and at the time of writing it is not generally available to a US operator. We track its availability closely because it changes the answer to this post the day it arrives. Until then, a page that puts NetSuite ERP against Zoho ERP in a feature grid is comparing a product you can buy with one you cannot, and you should treat it as marketing from whichever side wrote it.
So the comparison a US operator can make today is NetSuite against Zoho's set of applications, arranged to do what your NetSuite instance does. That is a fair comparison, and it has four parts.
One: the financial core.
Start with the ledger, because it is where an ERP decision is won or lost. For a company with one or two entities, a standard chart of accounts, ordinary revenue and no exotic consolidation, Zoho Books is a complete financial system: general ledger, receivables, payables, bank feeds, multi-currency, fixed assets, budgets, US sales tax and the audit trail an accountant expects. Put a finance team on it and they will find it faster to close in than NetSuite and less capable in the places NetSuite was built for.
Those places are the ones to test. Multi-subsidiary consolidation with intercompany eliminations. Revenue recognition for multi-element or milestone contracts. Statutory reporting across several countries. If your finance team uses any of those in NetSuite today, write down exactly what they do with it, and test Zoho Books against that list rather than against a grid. For many mid-market companies the list is short and Books covers it. For some it is the reason to stay, and it is better to know that in week one.
Two: the operating applications.
NetSuite's modules are Zoho's applications, and the comparison here is application by application, on the work your people actually do.
Inventory and order management is Zoho Inventory, and for a light manufacturer or a distributor with a handful of locations it does the job. For multi-location inventory with landed cost, serial and lot tracking and assembly builds, it does the job with more care in setup, and for full MRP it needs help. CRM is Zoho's strongest application and is usually a step up from NetSuite's. Projects and time billing are Zoho Projects and Books together, which works and which needs a join built between them for project margin, a subject we have written about separately. Support is Zoho Desk, which NetSuite customers usually run as a separate product anyway.
The pattern is the one we described in the honest comparison of NetSuite alternatives: the alternative is rarely one product, and the value of the alternative is in the joins between its parts. Those joins are a cost and a project, and they belong in the comparison.
Three: the customisation model.
This is the comparison that most pages skip and that matters most over five years. Every ERP gets customised, and the question is who can do it and what it costs.
NetSuite is customised in SuiteScript and SuiteFlow by NetSuite developers, of whom there are fewer than you would like, at rates that reflect that. Every customisation lives inside the suite and is tested against each release. Zoho is customised in Deluge and in Creator, by a much larger pool of developers, at lower rates, and customisations can live inside an application or as a separate Creator application alongside. We have written about when to build a custom Zoho application and when not to, and the same judgement applies to the exit decision.
The honest trade is this. NetSuite's customisation is deeper and dearer; Zoho's is broader and cheaper and easier to overdo. A company that has spent five years customising NetSuite heavily will find the exit expensive because the customisations have to be rebuilt. A company that has kept NetSuite close to standard will find the move straightforward, and will find that Zoho lets it build the things it always wanted and could not afford.
Four: the three-year cost.
Compare the total, not the licence. Over three years the licence is the certain number, and for a mid-market company the saving from NetSuite to a set of Zoho applications is large and real. The other numbers are the implementation, the integrations rebuilt to Zoho's shape, the data move, and the joins between the Zoho applications that NetSuite gave you for free by being one product.
Add them up honestly and the picture is usually this: Zoho is cheaper in year one only if the implementation is small, cheaper from year two in almost every case, and much cheaper by year three, at the cost of a suite that is a set of applications with joins you own rather than one product with a renewal letter. Whether that trade is worth it is the decision, and it depends on the answers to the first three comparisons more than on the fourth.
If you want the Zoho side of that on its own, our buyer's assessment of whether Zoho is worth it is the place to read it without the NetSuite framing.
What to refuse.
Refuse the grid. A page that lists sixty features with a tick for each side is comparing two things of different shapes as if they were the same shape, and it will tell you Zoho is missing things it has in a different application, and that NetSuite has things you do not use. Refuse the demonstration that shows you the destination without your data in it. And refuse the comparison that leaves out the joins, because the joins are where the second and third years of cost live.
How we approach it.
We run an ERP Readiness Review before we recommend anything. It makes the four comparisons above on your actual instance: what your finance team does in NetSuite, which modules you use and how, what customisations exist and which run the business, and what the three-year cost of each path is. It ends with a written recommendation that can be to stay on NetSuite, and sometimes is. If the recommendation is to move, it comes with a guaranteed estimate for the move, and the estimate is ours to hold.
When Zoho's ERP product becomes available to US operators, we will rewrite this post, because the comparison changes. Until then, the honest comparison is the one above, in four parts, and the answer to whether Zoho is a real alternative is that for most mid-market companies it is, as a set of applications with joins, and for some it is not yet, and the four comparisons tell you which you are.
The short version.
NetSuite vs Zoho is not one comparison, because Zoho's suite-shaped product is not something a US operator can buy today. Compare the financial core on the list of what your finance team actually does, the operating applications on the work your people actually do, the customisation model on what you have built and want to build, and the three-year cost with the joins included. Refuse the grid.
Know whether your business is ready for an ERP before you sign for one.
The ERP Readiness Review is a 90-minute working session plus a written scorecard across master data quality, documented exceptions, integration scope and data ownership. Fixed scope, no obligation. Or see how we approach it.
More on the same problem:
Comments