Campfire vs Rillet: Two AI-Native ERPs Compared

Campfire vs Rillet is the closest call on this site. Both call themselves the AI-native ERP, both sell to finance teams replacing a legacy system, both ship a general ledger, multi-entity consolidation, ASC 606 revenue recognition and an AI assistant, and neither publishes a price. Campfire differentiates on migration speed, a broader published integration catalog and milestone revenue. Rillet differentiates on documented controls, stated report types, named audit-firm alliances and a bigger, more openly reported customer base.

The short version: pick Campfire if you want to move fast, check the migration yourself and connect an unusual stack, including inventory or crypto tooling. Pick Rillet if auditors, an ICFR program or a board expect controls documentation you can hand over, or if the finance leadership wants a Big Four name attached to the implementation.

Campfire vs Rillet at a glance

All rows come from each vendor’s own pages as of September 2026.

Pricing: what each vendor will tell you

Neither company sells self-serve, and neither publishes a plan list, so the comparison is about how much each will tell a buyer before a sales call.

Rillet tells you more. Its help center states that “Rillet does not charge per seat or based on revenue” and that “our pricing is based on the features you use and your complexity”, and its security page confirms role-based access with no seat limits. It also publishes a single dollar figure, an implementation range of $10,000 to $30,000, on its comparison page against NetSuite. That page is vendor marketing, so the range is a claim about its own service rather than a quoted rate, but it is enough to start a budget.

Campfire publishes neither. There is no pricing page, no plan list, no trial and no free tier, and no about or security page either, so company facts have to come from its funding announcement. The only sizing guidance is third party: ERP Research places Campfire’s sweet spot at $20 million to $300 million in annual recurring revenue. The savings calculator on the site is a lead form, not a price.

On implementation the two make claims in opposite directions. Rillet’s is a price plus a duration, four to six weeks with its own CPAs and ex-auditors doing the work. Campfire’s argument is that the work mostly disappears: its Migration Agent moves the history, “most teams are live by their next close”, and chart of accounts cleanup is included rather than treated as a change order. Neither has priced that in public, so ask both for a fixed-fee implementation quote and for what happens if the data is worse than expected.

Partner considerations separate them more sharply than price does. Rillet publishes alliances with EY, KPMG and RSM, a dedicated EY alliance page and a partner advisory board, which matters if your auditor or an outsourced accounting team will work inside the system. Campfire has a partners menu but publishes no program terms, so who supports the system alongside you is a question for the sales call.

Where Campfire is stronger

• The integration catalog is broader and you can browse it. Campfire lists more than 100 native connectors by category, including an inventory category with Cin7 and DOSS, which journalize purchases, sales, stock movement and cost of goods sold into the general ledger, plus crypto accounting through TRES Finance and Cryptoworth, FloQast for close management, nine FP&A tools and Finch, which it says reaches more than 200 payroll systems. Rillet’s headline of 12,000 integrations is mostly Plaid bank coverage; its named native connector list is far shorter and has no inventory and no crypto.
• Milestone and project revenue is explicit. Campfire’s revenue page covers subscription, usage, milestone and transaction revenue, and says you can track project progress, recognize revenue at each milestone and invoice on completion. Rillet’s named revenue models are sales-led, product-led and usage-based, all subscription or consumption shapes. For a services or project business, that is the question to put to both vendors first.
• Currency support is quantified. Campfire publishes support for more than 180 currencies with unlimited entities and real-time consolidation. Rillet says global-ready and publishes no number.
• Permissions are granular at an unusual level. Campfire cites more than 1,200 granular permissions alongside policies, roles and approval workflows, and lists lease accounting among its subledgers.

Where Rillet is stronger

• Attestations are stated precisely. Rillet publishes SOC 1 Type II and SOC 2 Type II reports, audited annually by a third party and available for review. Campfire says it is “SOC 1 and SOC 2 certified” without naming a report type, and has no security page, so a Type I report and a Type II report are indistinguishable from the outside. For an audit committee, that distinction is the whole point of asking.
• AI controls are documented, not just claimed. Rillet states that 100 percent of AI actions are logged and that zero entries auto-post without approval, and describes materiality-tiered approvals, for example routing to a controller at $50,000 and a CFO at $500,000, period and subledger locks logged with reason and timestamp, and model changes running through IT general controls under SOX 404. Campfire’s published AI claim is about capability: its Large Accounting Model, which it says is trained exclusively on accounting data, is claimed to achieve 95 percent or better accuracy on key accounting tasks. Both are vendor statements, but they answer different questions, and only one of them is about what the software is prevented from doing.
• The customer base is larger and more openly described. Rillet states more than 600 customers, three publicly traded customers in production and customers with over $2 billion in revenue, and its logo wall runs past venture-backed software to Sotheby’s, Kickstarter and Foursquare. Campfire publishes no customer count, and its named customers, among them Replit, PostHog, TwelveLabs, Coder, Fora, Klarity, Boulder Care and Advisor360, are almost entirely venture-backed software and AI companies, with LimaOne named as a partnership and migrations off SAP cited in its funding announcement.
• It has raised roughly twice as much. Rillet states over $200 million from Sequoia, Andreessen Horowitz and ICONIQ. Campfire states $100 million: a $35 million Series A led by Accel and a $65 million Series B co-led by Accel and Ribbit in October 2025, with Foundation Capital and Y Combinator participating.
• Consolidation mechanics are spelled out. Rillet names intercompany eliminations and translation adjustments specifically, where Campfire describes consolidation across subsidiaries without naming the elimination mechanics.

Which one should you choose?

Choose Campfire if the stack is unusual and the connector list decides it, if revenue is earned by milestone or project rather than by subscription alone, if you want to test the system on your own data in a sandbox before committing, or if the priority is being live by the next close rather than running a project.

Choose Rillet if an auditor, an ICFR program or a planned listing means you need attestation types, approval thresholds and logged AI behavior in writing; if you want an implementation team the vendor employs and Big Four alliances behind it; or if you want a reference list that includes companies outside venture-backed software.

When neither fits, the usual reason is breadth. Any business that holds stock, manufactures or needs order management and CRM on the same platform should be looking at Oracle NetSuite or Sage Intacct instead, and Rillet vs NetSuite covers what a company gives up by choosing the newer product. Campfire’s Cin7 and DOSS integrations narrow that gap, but neither vendor has an inventory module of its own. At the other end, a company under a few million dollars in revenue with one entity and simple revenue will find both oversized, and is better served by Digits or Puzzle, both of which publish their prices.

Switching between them

Neither company mentions the other anywhere on its site, neither publishes a comparison against the other, and no tool exists for moving data between them, so a switch would be an ordinary ERP migration in both directions.

What each vendor promises on the way in is opposite, and it is the clearest difference in this pair. Campfire’s claim is speed with customer verification: “migrate your books in 15 minutes” through its Migration Agent, most teams live by their next close, every journal entry carried at transaction-level detail so prior periods stay queryable, a reconciliation workbook the customer checks, and a named implementation team of CPAs and a CFA behind the agent. Rillet’s claim is ownership: four to six weeks, white-glove, run by its own CPAs and ex-auditors, with the customer involved mainly to explain business workflows. Both are vendor claims and both should be tested with the same two questions: how many months of detailed history come across, and who signs off that the opening balance sheet ties.

One difference is worth weighing beyond the timeline. Campfire says it builds a sandbox with your own data before you commit, which turns the migration promise into something you can check during evaluation rather than after signing. Rillet says the timeline depends on the amount of historical data to migrate but does not document what is migrated, so that scope belongs in the contract.

Timing is the same for either: cut over at a period boundary, ideally the first day of a fiscal year, and keep the old system readable for the length of your audit retention policy rather than trusting migrated history alone in year one.

Frequently Asked Questions