Epicor Kinetic vs Propeller Comparison

Why choose Epicor Kinetic

• Higher Customization score (8/10 vs 5/10)

Why choose Propeller

• Higher Ease of Use score (8/10 vs 4/10)
• Higher Support score (7/10 vs 4/10)

Epicor Kinetic

Pros

• Combines manufacturing operations and finance in one system, so production costs flow straight to the ledger.
• Multi-company setup handles intercompany transactions, eliminations and consolidated group reports.
• Multiple books, currencies and languages with automatic currency conversion, which suits global plants.
• Highly configurable, which reviewers on Gartner single out as a strength.
• Choice of cloud, hybrid or on-premise deployment.

Cons

• No public pricing, and reviewers report frequent price increases and high consultant costs during implementation.
• Upgrades become hard once a system has been heavily customised.
• Reviewers call the BAQ report builder too complicated and describe a steep learning curve.
• Support and partner quality vary by region, and some reviewers complain of slow support.
• Payroll and expense management depend on separate modules or third-party tools.

Propeller

Pros

• Combines drone, LiDAR, GNSS rover and total station data on a single map, regardless of which hardware captured it.
• AeroPoints give survey-grade ground control without the manual surveying normally needed to set control points.
• Strong stockpile, cut and fill, and progress tooling, with a long track record in earthworks and aggregates.
• Integrates with common construction systems such as Procore, Trimble Connect, Autodesk Build and HCSS.
• The trust center shows a SOC 2 Type 2 attestation.

Cons

• No published software pricing, so buyers have to request a quote.
• Hardware such as AeroPoints and DirtMate adds separate costs on top of the software.
• Reviewers find less depth for vertical construction and interior fitout work.
• Some reviewers say the price may seem high to smaller clients.