GTreasury in Lake Zurich offers their treasury management system for funds and transfer management, liquidity tracking, customizable accounting rules with ERP integration, and other liquidity management features.
Simple and far more user-friendly than most other TMS applications I have used in the past. Very strong core TMS foundation and functionality. Addressing some of the known issues and shortfalls would go a long way in taking a much bigger market share from some of the other …
[In my opinion, GTreasury] seemed like it would be more robust than it [actually] is. [I feel that] the "user" screens are much less attractive than the sales pitch. [I believe that the] navigation and set up is harder than it needs to be which makes users not like it.
I have used Orbit and Kyriba in the past. Orbit from [a] previous company. It was fairly user-friendly even though it does not have all the bells and whistles. What I liked most about Orbit is the customer service. Everyone was very responsive. We chose GTreasury because we …
We liked the commitment GTreasury made regarding onboarding assistance plus the cost was reasonable and the functionality fit our needs. GTreasury also was focused on being there for their clients with the onboarding and also any daily assistance, which allowed us to manage …
It is well-suited for providing information about what cash is available and its future outlook of it. It helped us to link the multiple bank accounts that we have globally into one consolidated location. We were then able to ensure that we had the cash required to meet the various business needs that we have.
[In my opinion, the] reporting functions are not user-friendly and [are] very confusing.
[I also believe that the] financial accounting module is also not user-friendly.
Operator security - [In my opinion,] the admin is confusing to set up new groups. Some languages in there were either no longer valid or changed. [Also, I believe that you] cannot disable users unless you move them to disable group. [I feel like it's] a bit weird.
Customer service support - [I feel it has] gotten better but [I, personally,] hope to see more improvement and timely responses.
[I believe] the location of certain functions is confusing as well. [In my experience,] I usually have to go to [the] search bar to search for what I am looking for.
FBAR - [I feel this is] also a bit confusing and hard to find. [In my case,] I had to ask where it is located, and [it was] definitely not where I would have expected it to [be]. I would assume it would be under reporting, but it was under [the] library and then maintenance or something.
[I feel] it's too hard to use and navigate around [and] very difficult to manage/administer. We may keep it because [I feel] we [have] already gone through the pain point and don't want to risk going through that again. Unfortunately, if we keep it, [I believe] it's not because we love it.
Good overall usability for what we have needed. We have not delved into any recent upgrades in modules, so there could be better functionality within the system today that we are not currently leveraging. We plan on doing a refresh in 2022 to see where we might be able to take advantage of the recent offerings within the modules we use today.
Weekly meetings and updates a plus Set realistic timeline expectations Have a good project manager Make sure everyone is following the same time line and dependencies list Keep track of a future state or out of scope list You may need to change the scope and do a project request form change, that's OK if you determine a key function has been missed Don't be afraid to extend the timeline to make sure through testing has been done prior to going live Document set up decisions, how reports and worksheets work, and why certain user codes are or are not in the positioning reports.
Simple and far more user-friendly than most other TMS applications I have used in the past. Very strong core TMS foundation and functionality. Addressing some of the known issues and shortfalls would go a long way in taking a much bigger market share from some of the other main players in the TMS space. GTreasury was also very competitive on price and cost-effective.
Very positive ROI allowing us to take our daily cash target down to 1% of total admitted Assts. Prior to GTreasury we were running close to 20%.
Reduced bank service cost initially by $300,000+ and annually a minimum of $50,000.
Allowed us to maintain and streamline Treasury Staff FTE level, with the ability to train other areas for self service payment research, so the Treasury Analyst can focus on value added analysis tasks.
