Kyriba: Your Liquidity Performance Platform

My main use case for Kyriba  is reconciliations.

I can give you a specific example of how I use Kyriba  for reconciliations: we get payments coming to us, and they come under Kyriba to be manually updated. Once we get the payment and the GL account number where to post those payments, I go into Kyriba under cash accounting, cash management, cash review.

When I receive the payment, I believe it is automatically uploaded to Kyriba from the bank. Once it is uploaded into Kyriba, we need to post those payments to the accounting that whatever department expects those funds for us to update into Kyriba. I go under Cash and Liquidity, Cash Accounting, and then review entries to be manually updated. I go under the GL entries to be manually updated, and all the payments needing updates will be under this specific spot. From there, I click on the payment and update the accounting screen where the payment needs to go. Once all the payments are cleared and updated from Kyriba, we will send the file to SAP. That is how I use Kyriba for reconciliation.

I also use Kyriba to approve the ICD, short-term debt, and to approve wires. Once the positioning team is done creating the wires in Kyriba, I have to go into Kyriba to approve those wires.

The best feature that Kyriba offers is easy reconciliation. On the positioning side, there is a way where if we have a negative balance, instead of just having the negative sign by the amount or balance, we now have the possibility to have it colored in red, which makes it easier on the eyes and attracts attention.

Kyriba has positively impacted my organization by making our work easier compared to the first software we were using. Before I joined the company, they used something called TWS, Treasury Web Service or Treasury Web System. From conversations with my peers, they think Kyriba is an upgrade that works better for them compared to TWS.

It has saved time. My peers feel like the previous system was time-consuming compared to Kyriba, which has been an upgrade and is working great for us.

Something I would like to see improved in Kyriba is that on the reconciliation side, we do get payments where someone might send us a ten thousand dollar payment and then want that split into forty-five different entries. That is a very manual process, so I would like Kyriba to give us an opportunity to upload an entire entry, such as on a spreadsheet, into Kyriba and have it auto-populate. We could just check to make sure nothing was captured wrongly and adjust whatever has been captured incorrectly. In my reconciliation time, I have seen many payments coming in where they want them split into multiple entries, which is time-consuming and can lead to errors. Having the capacity to automatically upload a spreadsheet with multiple breakouts would be very helpful.

I have been using Kyriba for the past two and a half years.

For the most part, Kyriba is stable. We have had some roadblocks along the way, but for the most part, it is stable.

Kyriba's scalability is good.

Customer support from Kyriba is absolutely great from what I have witnessed. Anytime we reach out, we do get our issues solved.

Before I joined the company, my department used a system called TWS, Treasury Web Service or Treasury Web System. According to my colleagues, it was time-consuming and pretty manual, so they think Kyriba is better, works better, and is an upgrade from that.

I would advise others looking into using Kyriba to give it a chance; if they have something to compare it with, that would be great. I would recommend Kyriba to anyone who would like to try it.

I attended Kyriba Live in Las Vegas, and it was a great experience. This is my second time attending Kyriba conferences, and each time I have learned something new. I have connected with other industry individuals and met our consultant and the people who worked with Xcel on the Kyriba implementation. It has been a great experience attending those conferences, and I am looking forward to the next ones. I am also looking forward to the implementation of trusted agency AI or similar AI into Kyriba and seeing how that could help us improve our work in the days ahead.

My overall rating for this review is nine.

As a treasury tool, I have seen clients implement Kyriba  extensively. I have worked in the capacity as a consultant to guide them through the process of setting up Kyriba , more from a top-down business process perspective and how to manage the treasury pieces differently in different kinds of organizational financial setups.

Cash pooling is the specific example where I have extensively seen Kyriba being used for treasury management. What it means is the inter-company trades are not settled between those inter-company parties, but settled against the parent company code, sort of acting as an anchor between the two child nodes. The cash gets settled against the anchor nodes or the parent company, and then the parent company settles the differences to the other company codes in the network. A corporate company code acts as the cash pool, while the other entities within the group connect up with the cash pool or the corporate entity to settle inter-company trades, and that is where the book of records of inter-company settlements is maintained.

The setup I have seen more extensively is such that a capability, although it can be developed in an ERP solution, does require a lot of customizations to be developed, specifically in the setup of SAP ERP . Such a capability is possible to develop, but it is not out of the box. SAP does have its own treasury module which offers similar capability, but Kyriba certainly has a front-end setup that is more streamlined compared to what I have seen with SAP Treasury. That is why customers prefer Kyriba. The different rule sets that can be developed in a more user-friendly manner in Kyriba to perform the analysis and the final settlement postings make the usability present in Kyriba, while it requires more customization and enhancements in an SAP setup or a SAP Treasury setup, to be more specific.

The best features Kyriba offers, particularly in the context of cash pooling, include a more simplistic UI to see overall, especially for bigger corporates with more than 100 entities. It is easier to visualize the inter-company setup, where the open credits or debits are located. The UI seems to be the most stunning feature that stands out the most, followed up by the rule-setting process, which also appears to be more straightforward compared to what SAP Treasury offers.

These features do impact day-to-day operations for clients. It does save time, particularly at month-end close, where postings and adjustment postings have to be made across all legal entities. Having that capability is really beneficial, and the UI assists in applying the rule set across the whole corporate list of entities, which differentiates Kyriba, adding to the operational efficiency, specifically during the month-end close where time is limited. It certainly adds quite a lot of value.

Since Kyriba is more of a bolt-on, I suggest that more adapters are developed with ERP solutions, specifically S/4, as my idea for improvement. In cases of integration, the adapters were available, but the data sets had to be realigned. The structures in which SAP S/4 operates and the structures in Kyriba had to be mapped. If those can be developed out of the box, it would certainly smoothen the overall implementation experience. Additionally, moving open AR/AP positions from SAP S/4 to Kyriba is done as a batch load, meaning on request. If those interfaces are developed in real-time, so that real-time positions are always moved over to Kyriba, it would enhance the process even further because then the analysis is not contingent upon an on-demand pull request; it happens live. Tighter integration, and tighter real-time integration with the ERP ledgers, could help enhance the capabilities further.

Tighter integration certainly is the core area for improvement with Kyriba. In addition to that, I would say that the adoption of AI could be another enhancement in the UI. The context I would suggest for its implementation is within the analysis of discrepancies. Obviously, not everything reconciles perfectly anytime cash pooling is done, so identifying postings where the match cannot be performed, leading to necessary settlements, would be good areas for Kyriba to develop further capabilities.

I have been working in my current field for close to 15 to 18 years.

I have not particularly experienced any downtime or reliability issues with Kyriba. It is stable in my observation.

Given Kyriba operates in the cloud, its scalability is somewhat covered as part of the capabilities the cloud offers in terms of scaling. I could not point to any scaling issues that I have observed.

My experience with customer support has been that they were involved in some cases with integration, but I have not encountered any critical gaps.

I have seen clients using different treasury tools in their setups. From the perspective of a consultant, I do work with clients who have utilized SAP Treasury or SAP S/4 Treasury as another solution, while Kyriba was used by another client, providing me with a backdrop of different treasury modules or treasury applications.

I evaluated SAP Treasury before choosing Kyriba.

In terms of the positive impact Kyriba has on my organization or my client's organizations, I think the number of people required during month-end close has decreased. The company I have extensively seen using Kyriba is a railroad company with more than 150 entities in the group. The corporate workload during month-end close, especially with treasury, was much more streamlined. I have seen SAP Treasury being used for a large shipping container company, and in this context, the same railroad company implementing Kyriba clearly demonstrated a smoother month-end close. The application of the rule set and the visibility into the rule set getting applied for cash pooling certainly stands out as a key feature with Kyriba. While it is possible in SAP Treasury, the UI is not super streamlined for this process.

I do have some numbers on time saved. The month-end calendar for this company is approximately five to six days from when the period postings are locked and the month-end postings are performed. When it comes down to treasury, which takes around a day and a half, it comes down to under a day. In terms of hours saved in the overall month-end closing process, specifically for the treasury function, it certainly reduces time by more than 25 percent.

The general impression regarding return on investment is that I will not discuss specific money saved because it is client confidential, but I can state that for month-end close activities, there is at least a 25 percent and upwards reduction in the time it takes to close the books, which certainly translates into money saved and fewer resources needed. I also believe there are opportunities within Kyriba for tailored AI use cases to be enabled within the tool, which could help enhance this capability further, alongside the integration topics I mentioned.

My advice to others looking into using Kyriba is that it poses strong competition in the treasury market. Even if one has chosen SAP as the core book of records and for other corporate functions, it is worth considering Kyriba. It is a good bolt-on, similar to other tools such as Vertex  for pricing and PowerPlan for asset management. Kyriba is a very good competitor in the treasury space worth consideration.

The relationship with this vendor is more as partners rather than simply being customers. I partner with both big and small vendors.

I would rate this review an 8 overall.

My name is Hrushikesh Praveenand Thapar, and I am a Technology Specialist at Heineken Global Shared Services, Hyderabad, India.

I have been working with Kyriba  since 2022 to the present date.

I initially implemented the payments module while I was at Deloitte. At Heineken, we are using Kyriba  for bank statements and GL reconciliation and in intercompany loans.

The workflow involves another tool called SWIFT STM Broadridge, which acts as the SWIFT service bureau between the SWIFT network and the STM Broadridge tool. The payments flow via the ERP  to STM to the bank portal via the SWIFT network, and the bank statements come from the bank to STM and then to Kyriba.

Kyriba is the balance builder. It does not directly copy the balances from the statements. Instead, it builds the final balances using the transactions that are in the statement. So even if the balance is sometimes wrong or something, there would be an issue. Kyriba acts as a balance builder, which is a great feature as far as the bank statements are concerned. Another great feature is the position across all accounts, which helps treasurers get an insight on the position across the operating companies and subsidiaries at a glance.

I would also highlight payments and the APIs. Apart from the SFTP and SWIFT service bureau, the API connectivity and the customizability and the ease of implementing Kyriba helps a lot in convincing clients about choosing the best TMS  for their use case and also provides faster implementation timelines.

User experience is definitely a valuable feature. I have worked on SAP TRM, and the user experience is much simpler in terms of the end-user perspective in Kyriba, whether it is the payments module or the bank statement module. The daily tasks are straightforward and you have templates and easy insights into the daily tasks. If there is an error or if there are any rejected EBS, it is definitely easier to troubleshoot.

Treasury managers have better visibility to their idle cash. A glance overview of all accounts at one place is available without logging into each bank portal. This definitely provides better visibility and hence better use of the idle cash.

Reduced errors is another valuable feature. Going from Excel spreadsheets to Kyriba might be a bit of a hesitancy initially for the end-users, the people in the treasury front offices in the operating companies. However, once they get used to the tool, it has been very much handy and time-saving for the daily tasks.

There are a bit of glitches sometimes. Overall, it is pretty stable and it is cloud-based. I think it is pretty good as far as the tool is concerned compared to other treasury management systems. It is pretty stable and offers much more functionality.

There is room for improvement in terms of making the user experience better. If Kyriba can improve the user experience with a smoother interface, I think that would be enough. It is already smooth enough and there are monthly Windows patching as well that happens with improvements and upgrades. I think they are already doing this and the updates would follow.

I have been working with Kyriba since 2022 to the present date.

There are a bit of glitches sometimes. Overall, it is pretty stable and it is cloud-based. I think it is pretty good compared to other treasury management systems. It is pretty stable and offers much more functionality.

It is pretty much stable. There are no known glitches as of now. Even if there is any downtime, it is prescheduled and informed in advance.

It is pretty high. We definitely have many operating companies under it, so it is scalable. I would not say it is not scalable. Compared to SAP TRM, it might be a bit lesser, but it is definitely a much faster implementation than SAP TRM. It has its own benefits and is definitely scalable.

Customer support has been great. Kyriba's support portal is available and they have been pretty responsive, even after the implementation. Any query or knowledge question in terms of the tool or any functionality is handled pretty well by Kyriba support.

This was the first TMS  that was implemented. It was chosen as the most suitable one after comparing across other treasury management systems.

The initial setup was pretty good.

We looked at the implementation timelines and the support. SAP TRM, G-Treasury, and FIS Quantum were other options we compared.

It is definitely not very cheap, but it is definitely useful once the end-user knows how to get the maximum value from the tool. The benefits might seem less in the near term, but in the long term, it definitely offers tangible and substantial benefits.

I would recommend comparing the functionalities and the implementation timelines, and then make your call. The results would definitely be in the favor of Kyriba, depending on your use case.

There is room for improvement in terms of making the user experience better. Nothing comes to mind as of now in terms of what they have not been pretty good about. If they can improve the user experience with a smoother interface, I think that would be enough. It is already smooth enough and there are monthly Windows patching as well that happens with improvements and upgrades. I think they are already doing this and the updates would follow. When considering Kyriba, setup cost should be discussed and long-term benefits should be considered. My overall review rating for Kyriba is eight.