Compare infofloprint and corcentric on pricing, features, platforms, and ratings — both Invoicing tools, paid vs Quote-based / contact sales — Corcentric does…
At a Glance
infofloprint
corcentric
Primary category
Invoicing
Invoicing
Rating
Not documented
Not documented
Pricing model
paid
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
$349/mo
Not documented
Free plan
Not documented
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
Not documented
Not documented
Pricing Compared
Starting price reflects the lowest paid tier, not the full cost for every team size or usage level.
infofloprint
No individual plan breakdown documented yet.
corcentric
No individual plan breakdown documented yet.
Pros & Cons
infofloprint
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.