Compare gofactox and corcentric on pricing, features, platforms, and ratings — both Invoicing tools, Freemium subscription with a free plan and two paid…
At a Glance
gofactox
corcentric
Primary category
Invoicing
Invoicing
Rating
Not documented
Not documented
Pricing model
Freemium subscription with a free plan and two paid annual tiers
Quote-based / contact sales — Corcentric does not publish self-serve pricing tiers; costs vary by solution (AP, AR, procurement, fleet, managed services) and are provided via a custom sales quote.
Starting price
€99/year
Not documented
Free plan
Yes
Not documented
Free trial
Not documented
Not documented
Platforms
Not documented
Web
Team collaboration
Not documented
Not documented
AI features
Not documented
Yes
Public API
Yes
Not documented
Pricing Compared
Starting price reflects the lowest paid tier, not the full cost for every team size or usage level.
gofactox
No individual plan breakdown documented yet.
corcentric
No individual plan breakdown documented yet.
Pros & Cons
gofactox
Pros
Generates Factur-X invoices validated as PDF/A-3B compliant (146 of 146 verapdf rules) directly inside WooCommerce
Free Starter tier lets stores try manual invoice generation before committing to a paid plan
Compatible with WooCommerce HPOS and the block-based Checkout, plus WooCommerce Subscriptions, WPML and Polylang
No vendor lock-in — generated files are transmitted through the merchant's own Plateforme Agréée account (e.g. Iopole, Pennylane, Chorus Pro)
Cons
Interface and documentation are French-language only, which may limit adoption outside francophone markets
Only useful to merchants running WooCommerce — not a fit for stores on other e-commerce platforms
Automatic per-order generation, credit notes, and the REST API are gated behind the paid Pro/Business tiers
corcentric
Pros
Covers the full source-to-pay and order-to-cash lifecycle under one vendor, reducing the need to stitch together separate AP, AR, and procurement tools.
Combines software with optional managed services (managed AP, AR, sourcing, procurement, payments), useful for teams that lack in-house staff.
Long operating history (founded 1996) and large existing customer base (2,000+ North American customers, $112B+ transaction volume) suggest enterprise-grade stability.
Dedicated Fleet Solutions line (procurement/GPO, financing, analytics, remarketing) is a differentiator versus generic AP/AR platforms.
Cons
No public, self-serve pricing — buyers must go through a sales/quote process, which slows evaluation versus self-serve SaaS competitors.
Enterprise/managed-services orientation likely makes it a poor fit for small businesses or teams wanting a lightweight, self-configured tool.
Specific third-party software integrations are not clearly documented on the public site, making pre-purchase integration checks harder.
Breadth across AP, AR, procurement, fleet, and payments could mean less depth than best-of-breed point solutions in any single category.