Anchor vs. Oracle Textura Payment Management

They are at the top of our list to implement for our subs.

Incentivized

• AIA Billing
• ACH Payments
• SOV Management
• Communications
• User Management
• Compliance Holds

Incentivized

• Signatory workflow - Logging into the signatory and notary in the same process. There isn't as much separation as there could be.
• We could use a place to put in our job number. Running reports to ensure we billed everything in our system matches what's in Textura isn't easy because there are different job names.
• If our authorized signer inadvertently fails to execute the application and the GC closes the draw period, it appears as though the pay application was never submitted. From what I can see, there is no clear audit trail reflecting that it had been prepared or pending signature prior to the draw closing.

Incentivized

It has a great user interface that is regularly being updated and improved. The platform is intuitive and the product team regularly engages with an industry partnership team to make sure it is staying up to date with the way our users expect the tool to perform. They also have the backing of Oracle's robust user base and UI teams

Incentivized

Oracle Textura Payment Management is better and more refined than similar products. Procore has a ton of other useful features and GCPay is straightforward with a simple UI. Like most things in tech, it comes down to user base and Oracle Textura Payment Management has the most jobs of ours using it meaning it has the biggest positive impact on our business.

Incentivized

• We’ve reduced billing-related back-and-forth with GCs.
• Lien waiver compliance is more controlled and tracked.
• Cash flow is easier to predict because we receive payment notifications when they are initiated.

Incentivized