Six evidence states
Research statements should carry the strength and limits of their evidence. These states can coexist on one profile; they are not vendor scores.
Officially documented
A capability or scope described in official vendor or product material. Attribute the claim; check the module and release. It does not establish a customer outcome.
Independently corroborated
Credible third-party analysis supports the stated context or capability. State what was actually corroborated; do not extend it to untested features.
Customer-reported
A specific attributable customer or reviewer experience. Retain the date, role, product scope and publication context; vendor-hosted reports remain labelled as such.
Editorial inference
An interpretation drawn from evidence, including architecture hypotheses and potential use cases. It remains separate from a direct product claim.
Unclear / not publicly verified
The available evidence does not support a definitive conclusion. State the question that a vendor, demonstration or project must answer.
Potentially outdated
Evidence may have been affected by release changes, acquisition or a different product layer. Keep the historical context and seek current confirmation.
A requirements-led fit framework
| Step | Working question |
|---|---|
| Business need | What decision or recurring planning problem must improve? |
| Planning requirement | Which logic, sources, users, outputs and controls are required? |
| Capability | What must the platform or surrounding architecture do? |
| Evidence | Which dated source or demonstration supports that claim? |
| Open question | What remains uncertain or depends on configuration? |
| Solution fit | Does the demonstrated architecture meet the agreed requirements? |
Source dates and review dates are different
A source’s publication date describes that piece of evidence. A review date records when this guide assessed it. Reviewing an old source does not make the underlying evidence new.
Where a vendor page supplies no publication or update date, this guide says so. Release-dependent material should be checked against the product version relevant to the decision.
The primary evidence base is the supplied Deep Research Report dated 11 October 2026. A supplementary review of Loyos bi, KERN Allevo and the industrial SAP / product-cost bridge was added on the same date. Primary pages were checked for the additions; legacy and release-dependent references retain their limits.
Editorial independence and commercial context
This guide is produced by Gunnar Schlüter and includes routes to discuss bounded specialist work. Research prominence reflects depth of coverage and relevance to the question, not a preferred-vendor position.
This preview carries no paid-placement or affiliate mechanism. Inclusion does not establish a partnership, certification, sponsorship or endorsement. Any future commercial relationship should be disclosed on the affected page.
The ecosystem is a deliberately selected set of twelve profiles. It is not an exhaustive market survey, and this guide has not independently tested every product capability.
A real editorial correction route
Use the research-correction email to identify the claim, exact product or release, source date and proposed correction. A provider can submit factual feedback without discussing a commercial project.
Assess feedback against the same evidence states, date the update and retain the distinction between vendor documentation and independent evidence. If feedback is received, use the label “Factual review received from provider”; that label does not mean recommended or approved.
Sources & research notes
The guide builds on the supplied Deep Research Report and the supplementary Loyos bi / Allevo research reviewed on 11 October 2026. The references below identify this page’s evidence. Vendor documentation establishes a stated capability; implementation fit and outcomes require separate validation. Editorial frameworks and illustrations are identified in the text.
- AFP: Driver-based Models and Plans ↗Professional association guidance · 5 March 2024 · Reviewed 11 October 2026
- Corporate Planning: Integrated financial planning and budgeting ↗Official vendor documentation · Publication/update date not stated · Reviewed 11 October 2026
- Lucanet: Causal joins the Lucanet Group ↗Official acquisition announcement · 31 October 2024 · Reviewed 11 October 2026
Help improve this research.
Send the claim, product or release, a dated source and the correction you propose.