headcount365 vs TeamOhana

TeamOhana is venture-backed and does not publish its pricing. That's not unusual for the category, but it means you should ask directly: How have renewal prices trended for existing customers? Are pricing commitments written into the contract, or subject to change at renewal?

headcount365 is self-funded and profitable. We don't answer to outside investors, and we put our pricing commitments in writing — so the price you plan around is the price you pay.

Ask any vendor for a line-item breakdown of what's in the tier you're quoted. Specifically ask whether scenario planning, budgeting tools, SSO, integrations, and premium support are included or add-ons. Independent comparisons have noted that scenario modeling in TeamOhana is gated by pricing tier rather than available to all customers.

With headcount365, budgeting, scenario planning, SSO, integrations, and support are all included in Core. One price, one platform.

Implementation is where headcount platforms succeed or fail. Ask who does the integration work, how long migration takes, and what happens when your org structure, comp model, or approval flows don't fit the default template.

G2 reviewers describe TeamOhana's initial setup as tedious, particularly around data migration and integration with existing HR and payroll systems. That doesn't mean it can't be done, it means you should ask what the process looks like for a company shaped like yours.

headcount365 was built by people who ran headcount operations inside companies like Uber, Bird, and AppNexus, and who rolled out headcount practices across hundreds of portfolio companies for investors like Insight Partners and OpenView. Implementation is handled entirely in-house by that team.

Read the reviews yourself — all of them. TeamOhana holds a 4.6/5 average across 100 reviews on G2. Customers consistently praise its ease of use, customer success team, and centralized planning. The most common criticisms are missing features, occasional software bugs, integration gaps, and limited customization.

There is also at least one detailed, highly critical review on G2 raising more serious concerns about implementation and support. We're not going to characterize it for you — we'd rather you read it in full, alongside the positive reviews, and ask TeamOhana about it directly.

We hold ourselves to the same standard: read our G2 reviews too, and ask our customers the hard questions.

Ask about the edges: bulk import/export of your own data, admin self-service, and custom reporting. G2 reviewers have noted that TeamOhana cannot currently ingest FTE data for part-time employees, and have asked for stronger admin controls and self-service data ownership, such as bulk import and export of job catalog data.

Whatever platform you choose, test these workflows live in the demo with your own data — not the vendor's sample dataset.