The interface presents some challenges, particularly in connecting to other systems. The product itself was somewhat expensive. There were significant issues that led to discontinuing use of the product.
The business rules behind the forms need improvement, and the total processing time should be enhanced with the help of proper commands, specifically regarding the execution time of existing rules.
Director at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Mar 20, 2025
Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud could improve by creating a more visual and user-friendly interface similar to the old ABC analytics. The ability to easily distribute costs visually, using clicks and arrows to move around drivers, would make it easier for users to understand the processes.
Oracle made a mistake by forcing HFM users to transition to FCCS before the solution was mature enough. It caused many clients to opt for OneStream due to its similarity with HFM. FCCS initially lacked customization options, which deterred clients. Oracle is improving FCCS, but further enhancements are necessary to match its planning applications.
Learn what your peers think about Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: December 2025.
Oracle initially forced HFM users to migrate to FCCS, which was difficult because moving applications wasn't easy. Many clients chose OneStream due to this ease of transition. FCCS should have been more open to customizations initially. Oracle has made improvements, but FCCS should be continually enhanced to match their planning applications.
There are some issues with block creation in the memory. Sometimes, when we run a calculation and a new intersection is hit during the calculation, the memory block doesn't get created, which doesn't give the correct result. Again, we have to do some back-and-forth. We have to use some more functions or alternative functions to enable block creation. But there are not many issues. It's a good tool. These kinds of shortcomings will always be there in every tool.
There is middleware that we need to purchase for our use case that should be provided in Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud. We should not have to purchase the additional solution and the integration should be seamless.
Functional Hyperion Administrator at a non-profit with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Mar 17, 2022
The FR recording studio that is used to build reports is clunky and awful to use. This could be improved a lot. The solution does have problems and limitations.
Hyperion Lead and Reporting Manager at a energy/utilities company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Jan 13, 2022
I definitely preferred Hyperion in the way it was organized compared to this product. I understand this solution is more of a budgeting tool, and so they've put their consolidation tool under that. Due to the fact that it's a space cube, for smaller companies like ours, the way that Hyperion was a relational database worked better for reporting. Some of the things in this product are just too cumbersome and we don't need them and they make it harder to do certain things, or certain things have to have more specific names or descriptions. You have to put in strange characters that make it look not as sleek. It would be nice if we had an option when using the ad hoc querying to see a member name and the description. In this solution, you can't pull both, you can only pull one or the other, and sometimes that's confusing. If you want an account, you might want to see the account number and the account name. That's super helpful to those of us in accounting and reporting, however, that's not currently an option. You can only pick one or the other right now. If they could somehow add that, that would be fantastic.
EPM/BI certified Consultant, Oracle ACE and TeraCorp Consulting CEO at TeraCorp Consulting
Consultant
Top 20
Mar 1, 2017
I think the biggest improvement would be to have direct access to other CS products you have; for example, that BICS could access directly the PBCS machine to produce dashboards or, better, ODI loading and extract data/metadata using a KM. This is in the Oracle road map.
Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud Service enables organizations of all sizes to drive accurate, connected plans across your business and be prepared for what's next. Navigate uncertainty with scenario modeling. Leverage built-in best practices and predictive intelligence across finance, line of business, and operations.Planning, Budgeting, and Forecasting
ยท Create decision-oriented plans: Make better decisions by creating goal-oriented, driver-based plans. Get immediate...
The Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud can be improved in various ways.
The interface presents some challenges, particularly in connecting to other systems. The product itself was somewhat expensive. There were significant issues that led to discontinuing use of the product.
Cloud services are what I would like to see improved, specifically Planning Cloud and Essbase on Cloud.
The business rules behind the forms need improvement, and the total processing time should be enhanced with the help of proper commands, specifically regarding the execution time of existing rules.
Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud could improve by creating a more visual and user-friendly interface similar to the old ABC analytics. The ability to easily distribute costs visually, using clicks and arrows to move around drivers, would make it easier for users to understand the processes.
Oracle made a mistake by forcing HFM users to transition to FCCS before the solution was mature enough. It caused many clients to opt for OneStream due to its similarity with HFM. FCCS initially lacked customization options, which deterred clients. Oracle is improving FCCS, but further enhancements are necessary to match its planning applications.
Oracle initially forced HFM users to migrate to FCCS, which was difficult because moving applications wasn't easy. Many clients chose OneStream due to this ease of transition. FCCS should have been more open to customizations initially. Oracle has made improvements, but FCCS should be continually enhanced to match their planning applications.
There are some issues with block creation in the memory. Sometimes, when we run a calculation and a new intersection is hit during the calculation, the memory block doesn't get created, which doesn't give the correct result. Again, we have to do some back-and-forth. We have to use some more functions or alternative functions to enable block creation. But there are not many issues. It's a good tool. These kinds of shortcomings will always be there in every tool.
The tool's interface is outdated. However, OneStream is easier to navigate.
One potential improvement would be a more visual workflow, as the current method using a tax list is not as effective.
There is middleware that we need to purchase for our use case that should be provided in Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud. We should not have to purchase the additional solution and the integration should be seamless.
The FR recording studio that is used to build reports is clunky and awful to use. This could be improved a lot. The solution does have problems and limitations.
I definitely preferred Hyperion in the way it was organized compared to this product. I understand this solution is more of a budgeting tool, and so they've put their consolidation tool under that. Due to the fact that it's a space cube, for smaller companies like ours, the way that Hyperion was a relational database worked better for reporting. Some of the things in this product are just too cumbersome and we don't need them and they make it harder to do certain things, or certain things have to have more specific names or descriptions. You have to put in strange characters that make it look not as sleek. It would be nice if we had an option when using the ad hoc querying to see a member name and the description. In this solution, you can't pull both, you can only pull one or the other, and sometimes that's confusing. If you want an account, you might want to see the account number and the account name. That's super helpful to those of us in accounting and reporting, however, that's not currently an option. You can only pick one or the other right now. If they could somehow add that, that would be fantastic.
Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud could improve by having better integration with some other modules that we would add to this solution.
I think the biggest improvement would be to have direct access to other CS products you have; for example, that BICS could access directly the PBCS machine to produce dashboards or, better, ODI loading and extract data/metadata using a KM. This is in the Oracle road map.