#floQast vs Workiva
#floQast vs Workiva, compared side by side on 19 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: #floQast is on 67/100 and Workiva on 29/100.
Where each one leads
#floQast
- our overall score: 67/100 against 29/100
- agent readiness: 40/100 against 25/100
Workiva
- headcount: 3,297 against 862
- LinkedIn following: 139,288 against 35,123
At a glance
| Measure | #floQast | Workiva |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Cloud-based financial close management software that automates accounting processes using AI. | AI-powered platform unifying data and processes for finance, accounting, sustainability, risk, and audit teams. |
| Category | Accounting Automation, Accounting Software, Financial Close Management, Workflow Automation | Enterprise Software, Sustainability, Risk Management, Audit |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Software | Platform |
| Founded | 2013 | 2008 |
| Headquarters | Los Angeles, United States | Ames, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | #floQast | Workiva |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 862 | 3,297 |
| Open roles | Not published | 73 |
| Total funding | $303M | Not published |
| Latest round | Series E | Not published |
| Valuation | $1.6B | Not published |
| LinkedIn followers | 35,123 | 139,288 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | #floQast | Workiva |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 67/100 | 29/100 |
| Traction | 60/100 | 20/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 30/100 |
| Community | 15/100 | 8/100 |
| Search visibility | 35/100 | 35/100 |
| Quality | 78/100 | Not published |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (40/100) | F (25/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 72/100 | 75/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | #floQast | Workiva |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Not detected | AWS |
| CDN | Cloudflare | CloudFront |
| CMS | Webflow | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Not detected | Jquery, Bootstrap |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager, Segment | Google Tag Manager |
| Open source | No | Yes |
Product and pricing
| Measure | #floQast | Workiva |
|---|---|---|
| Key features | Not published | Generative AI for Reporting, Unified Assured Integrated Reporting, Comprehensive Data Management & Linking, Intelligent Productivity & Automation, Proactive Risk & Compliance Management, Scalable & Adaptable Platform |
#floQast vs Workiva: common questions
Which is better, #floQast or Workiva?
On our 0-100 score #floQast rates higher (67/100 against 29/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 19 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do #floQast and Workiva compare on the numbers?
#floQast leads on our overall score (67/100 against 29/100), agent readiness (40/100 against 25/100). Workiva leads on headcount (3,297 against 862), LinkedIn following (139,288 against 35,123).
Read the full #floQast review and pricing or the Workiva review and pricing. You can also browse other #floQast alternatives we track.