Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Get a Demo
See your data in HubiFi < 2 days
Understand the principal vs agent distinction in revenue recognition with this guide. Learn how it impacts financial reporting and compliance.
Revenue recognition is the heartbeat of your business's financial health. Getting it right matters. A key piece of this puzzle is understanding whether your business acts as a principal or an agent. This isn't just accounting jargon—it fundamentally impacts how you report revenue. Let's break down the principal vs agent distinction, explore why it's so important, and give you actionable steps to determine your role in every transaction.
Agent vs. Principal Distinction is Crucial: Understanding whether your business acts as an agent or principal is fundamental for accurate revenue recognition. This distinction affects how you report revenue and can significantly impact your financial statements.
Control is Key in Classification: The primary factor in determining agent or principal status is control over goods or services. Key indicators include primary responsibility for fulfillment, inventory risk, and pricing discretion. Assessing these factors helps ensure proper classification.
Compliance and Technology Go Hand-in-Hand: Adhering to revenue recognition standards like ASC 606 and IFRS 15 is essential. Leveraging technology solutions, such as HubiFi's automated revenue recognition tools, can streamline compliance efforts and reduce the risk of misclassification.
In the world of revenue recognition, the roles of agent and principal are more than just accounting terms—they're crucial concepts that can significantly impact your financial reporting. Let's break down these roles and why they matter so much.
A principal is the main party in a transaction, directly providing goods or services to the customer. They have control over these offerings before they're transferred to the customer. On the flip side, an agent arranges for another party (the principal) to provide goods or services. Agents typically earn a commission or fee for their role in facilitating the transaction.
Control is a critical factor in determining whether your company acts as a principal or an agent. Your company is the principal if it controls the good or service before transferring it to the customer. This means your company can direct the use of – and receive substantially all of the remaining benefits from – the promised good or service. In simpler terms, if your company directs the product's journey to the customer and reaps the rewards, it's likely the principal. For a more detailed explanation, check out PwC's guidance on principal versus agent framework.
Several indicators can help you determine control. Does your company have primary responsibility for fulfilling the order? Does your business bear the inventory risk? Does your company have the discretion to set prices? Answering "yes" to these questions points towards being a principal. If another party handles these aspects, your company might be acting as an agent.
Understanding the difference between promising delivery and providing the right to obtain a good or service is crucial. If your company sells the right to a good or service, it likely acts as the principal. For example, if a customer buys a ticket to an event through your platform, and you've already secured those tickets, you're selling them the right to attend. Your company is the principal in this scenario.
If your company simply arranges for the delivery of a good or service, it's likely acting as an agent. Think of a food delivery service. They don't own the food; they facilitate the delivery from the restaurant (the principal) to the customer. KSM's article, "Principal Versus Agent: Which Are You?", offers additional insights into this distinction. Grasping this nuance is key to accurate revenue recognition.
Understanding whether your business acts as a principal or an agent is critical for accurate financial reporting and compliance with accounting standards. This classification determines how you recognize revenue—principals report revenue on a gross basis, while agents report on a net basis. Getting this wrong can lead to overstated or understated revenue, potentially misleading investors and regulators.
Understanding whether your business operates as a principal or an agent isn’t just an accounting detail; it fundamentally shapes how you recognize revenue. This directly impacts the five-step model outlined by ASC 606 and IFRS 15. This model provides a systematic approach, and your classification influences how you navigate each step.
Misclassifying your role can lead to discrepancies in your financial reporting, potentially misrepresenting your business's performance. For detailed guidance, resources like the PwC guide on revenue recognition emphasize that determining principal versus agent status isn't a choice—it depends on the specifics of each transaction. Understanding these nuances is essential for accurate financial health. For tailored solutions to automate and streamline your revenue recognition, explore HubiFi's automated revenue recognition tools.
Two major standards govern revenue recognition: ASC 606 for US GAAP and IFRS 15 for international financial reporting. Both provide frameworks for determining whether an entity is a principal or an agent in a transaction.
ASC 606 outlines a five-step process for revenue recognition:
In the context of principal vs. agent determinations, ASC 606 focuses on the concept of control. If your entity controls the specified good or service before it's transferred to the customer, you're likely acting as a principal.
ASC 606 provides a clear framework for revenue recognition, and a core part of that framework hinges on whether a company acts as a principal or an agent in a transaction. This distinction is crucial because it directly impacts how revenue is reported. Principals recognize revenue based on the gross amount of the sale—the total value of the transaction. Agents, on the other hand, report revenue on a net basis, recognizing only their commission or fee. This difference in reporting can significantly impact a company’s financial statements, so accurate classification is essential.
Determining whether your company acts as a principal or an agent involves a two-step process. First, you identify the specific good or service provided to the end customer. This clarifies what’s being delivered. Second, determine whether your company controls that good or service before it reaches the customer. “Control” means having the power to direct the use of—and obtain substantially all of the remaining benefits from—that good or service. If your company controls the good or service, you’re likely the principal. If not, you’re likely the agent.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) introduced a major shift in revenue recognition standards with ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This update significantly impacts how businesses determine their roles as principals or agents, emphasizing the evaluation of control and providing detailed guidance on assessing the indicators of control. Understanding and applying ASU 2014-09 is essential for complying with current revenue recognition standards. For automated solutions and support in navigating these complexities, consider exploring HubiFi's automated revenue recognition tools.
IFRS 15 provides a similar framework to ASC 606 but with some nuanced differences. It emphasizes a two-step approach for assessing principal vs. agent status:
While the underlying principles are similar, IFRS 15 may lead to different conclusions in some complex scenarios compared to ASC 606.
When determining whether an entity is acting as a principal or an agent, several key indicators come into play. These indicators help assess the level of control an entity has over the goods or services before they're transferred to the customer.
The entity with primary responsibility for fulfilling the promise to the customer is more likely to be the principal. This includes being responsible for the acceptability of the product or service. For example, if a company is responsible for delivering a product and handling customer service issues, it's likely acting as a principal.
Inventory risk is another crucial indicator. If an entity bears the risk of holding inventory before a customer order is placed or after customer return, it's more likely to be the principal. This risk demonstrates a level of control over the goods that's characteristic of a principal role.
When evaluating whether your business operates as a principal or an agent, it's essential to understand the various indicators of control. While factors like primary responsibility for fulfillment and inventory risk are critical, it's important to note that credit risk does *not* serve as an indicator of control. This means that simply bearing the risk of customer default or non-payment doesn't automatically classify your business as a principal. Instead, the focus should remain on the ability to direct the use of the goods or services and to derive the benefits from them before they are transferred to the customer. For example, imagine an online marketplace that facilitates transactions between buyers and sellers. Even if the marketplace assumes the risk of non-payment from the buyer, it doesn't necessarily mean they control the goods or services being sold. Their primary role might still be connecting buyers and sellers, acting as an agent.
As highlighted by KSM, “Credit risk is not an indicator of control,” emphasizing that the classification should be based on the actual control over the goods or services rather than the financial risks associated with customer transactions. This distinction is vital for ensuring accurate revenue recognition and compliance with accounting standards like ASC 606 and IFRS 15. Misclassifying your business as a principal when you're acting as an agent (or vice versa) can lead to significant misstatements in your financial reporting. These misstatements can have serious consequences, impacting investor confidence and potentially leading to regulatory scrutiny.
For businesses dealing with high transaction volumes, accurately assessing control and managing revenue recognition can be complex. Automating this process can significantly reduce the risk of errors and ensure compliance. If you're looking for a solution to streamline your revenue recognition, consider exploring automated tools like those offered by HubiFi. Our solutions are designed to help businesses manage complex revenue recognition scenarios, ensuring accuracy and compliance with relevant accounting standards.
The ability to set prices is a strong indicator of control. If an entity can establish the price for the goods or services provided to the customer, it's more likely acting as a principal. Agents typically have limited or no discretion in setting prices, as this is usually determined by the principal.
These indicators aren't exhaustive, and no single factor is determinative. Entities must consider all relevant facts and circumstances when making the principal vs. agent determination. The goal is to assess whether the entity controls the specified good or service before it's transferred to the customer, which is the core principle in both ASC 606 and IFRS 15 for this classification.
Understanding the distinction between principal and agent roles is crucial across various industries. Let's explore how this plays out in different sectors:
Online marketplaces like Etsy exemplify the agent role in revenue recognition. These platforms facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers without taking control of the goods being sold. Here's how it works:
In this scenario, Etsy acts as an agent because it doesn't control the goods sold, set prices, or bear inventory risk. The individual sellers are the principals in these transactions.
Retail companies typically act as principals in their revenue recognition. Take a traditional brick-and-mortar store or an e-commerce site that sells its own inventory:
In this case, the retailer is the principal because they control the goods before transferring them to customers, bear inventory risk, and have pricing discretion.
Service providers can act as either principals or agents, depending on the nature of their service. Let's consider two scenarios in asset management:
As a Principal:
As an Agent:
These examples illustrate how the principal-agent distinction applies across different business models and industries.
The principal/agent analysis isn’t limited to just a few industries. It applies to various business models, from online advertising and app sales to travel agencies and consignment shops. Understanding these concepts is key for accurate revenue reporting across the board. For high-volume businesses, managing these complexities can be challenging. Schedule a demo with HubiFi to learn how our automated solutions can simplify revenue recognition.
In online advertising, platforms like Google Ads or Facebook Ads act as agents, connecting businesses (the principals) with potential customers. The platform facilitates the advertising campaign but doesn’t control the actual product or service advertised. They earn a fee for connecting the two parties, and the business recognizes the full sale amount, less the platform fee. PwC offers further guidance on these distinctions. Accurately classifying these transactions is crucial for compliance with revenue recognition standards.
When you download a game from the Apple App Store or Google Play, these platforms are acting as agents. They facilitate the sale between the game developer (the principal) and the user. The platform takes a cut, but the developer recognizes the majority of the revenue. This principal/agent distinction is crucial for accurate revenue reporting in this three-party setup. For app developers with high sales volumes, managing these transactions efficiently is essential for financial reporting.
Consignment shops are a classic example of the agent model. The shop owner (agent) sells goods on behalf of the owner (principal). The shop owner earns a commission on each sale, while the original owner recognizes the bulk of the revenue. This model also applies to online platforms that facilitate consignment sales. Proper revenue recognition ensures accurate financial reporting for both the consignor and the consignee.
Travel agencies often act as agents, connecting travelers with airlines, hotels, and tour operators (the principals). The agency facilitates the booking and earns a commission, but the travel providers recognize the revenue for the actual service. Control over the service offering is a key factor in determining the principal vs. agent relationship. For travel agencies, understanding this distinction is vital for proper commission accounting.
In subcontracting, the general contractor often acts as the principal, while the subcontractor provides specialized services. The general contractor is responsible for the overall project and recognizes the full revenue, while the subcontractor recognizes the payment received for their specific services. Each transaction's specific facts determine the relationship. Clear contracts and accurate accounting are essential for proper revenue allocation in these arrangements.
Delivery apps like DoorDash or Uber Eats act as agents, connecting restaurants (the principals) with customers. The app facilitates the delivery and takes a commission, but the restaurant recognizes the revenue for the food itself. Cash flow between parties is a factor to consider, but it isn't the sole determinant of the principal/agent relationship. For restaurants partnering with delivery apps, accurate revenue tracking is essential for managing profitability.
Loyalty programs can get tricky. A company might be a principal for some rewards and an agent for others. For example, if a company offers points redeemable for its own products, it’s acting as a principal. But if those points can be redeemed for goods from another company, it’s acting as an agent. This duality can exist within the same contract. Properly classifying these transactions ensures accurate revenue recognition and compliance with accounting standards.
The classification as a principal or agent significantly impacts how a company reports its revenue and, consequently, its financial statements.
The key difference in revenue reporting between principals and agents lies in gross versus net presentation:
For example, if a travel booking site (acting as an agent) facilitates a $1,000 hotel reservation and earns a 10% commission, they would only report $100 as revenue. In contrast, if the hotel itself (acting as a principal) receives the $1,000 booking, they would report the full amount as revenue.
This distinction can dramatically affect a company's reported revenue figures and related financial ratios, potentially influencing investor perceptions and financial analysis.
Understanding the distinction between principal and agent roles is vital for intermediaries and vendors. It directly influences how they recognize revenue and report their financial performance. A seemingly small classification error can have a ripple effect, impacting everything from financial statements to investor relations and even your ability to secure financing.
The core principle hinges on control. As PwC explains in its guide on the principal versus agent framework, “determining ‘principal’ versus ‘agent’ isn’t a choice; it’s based on the specific facts of each transaction.” This means you can't simply choose the classification that looks better on paper. You must carefully assess your role in each transaction. Do you control the goods or services before they reach the customer? Can you set the selling price? These are key questions to consider. PwC further clarifies that “control means the ability to direct the use of the good or service and get most of the benefits from it.”
KSM reinforces this, stating that “the classification as principal or agent significantly impacts how a company reports its revenue, and consequently, its financial statements." This isn't just about ticking boxes for compliance. It's about presenting an accurate picture of your financial health. Misclassifying your role can lead to substantial differences in reported revenue, potentially misleading investors and affecting financial analysis. KSM highlights the core difference: "Principals report revenue on a gross basis; agents report revenue net.” If you're acting as an agent, you only recognize your commission or fee as revenue. This can significantly understate your top line compared to principals who report the full transaction amount. KSM also notes that “the ability to set prices is a strong indicator of control.”
For businesses processing high volumes of transactions, accurately determining principal/agent status for each one can be complex and time-consuming. This is where automated solutions can help. By integrating data from various sources and applying the appropriate accounting rules, these tools can streamline revenue recognition, ensuring accuracy and compliance while freeing up your team to focus on strategic initiatives. For more insights on optimizing your financial operations, explore the HubiFi blog or schedule a demo to see how we can help you gain better control of your data and financial reporting.
Accurate classification as a principal or agent is crucial for compliance with accounting standards like ASC 606 and IFRS 15. Misclassification can lead to:
Companies must be prepared to justify their classification decisions with clear documentation of their assessment process. This includes analyzing contracts, business models, and the indicators of control discussed earlier.
Proper classification ensures that financial statements accurately reflect the economic substance of transactions, providing stakeholders with reliable information for decision-making.
Determining whether a company acts as a principal or an agent can be complex, especially in today's diverse business landscape. Let's explore some common challenges and the consequences of getting it wrong.
Modern business arrangements often involve multiple parties and intricate service structures, making it challenging to determine who truly controls the goods or services. Some complex scenarios include:
In these cases, companies must carefully analyze each element of the transaction to determine their role. For instance, a subscription box service might act as a principal for some products they curate and control, but as an agent for others where they merely facilitate the sale.
The key is to assess control at each step of the transaction. This often requires a deep understanding of the business model and the specific terms of each contract involved.
In the intricate world of revenue recognition, it's important to grasp that a company can wear two hats—acting as both a principal and an agent within the same contract. This duality often emerges when a contract involves different goods or services, each requiring its own classification based on who's really in control. For example, imagine an e-commerce platform that sells its own products and also provides a marketplace for third-party sellers. The platform acts as a principal for its own products but as an agent for the third-party goods.
As PwC's guidance points out, “A company can be a principal for some goods/services and an agent for others within the same contract.” This isn't a one-size-fits-all situation; it requires careful consideration of each transaction's specific details. Pinpointing whether your company acts as a principal or an agent hinges on the concept of control. The same PwC resource emphasizes, “The determination of ‘principal’ versus ‘agent’ is not a choice; it’s based on the specific facts of each transaction.” This highlights the need for businesses to carefully evaluate their roles, as the implications for revenue recognition are substantial. Principals report revenue on a gross basis (the full transaction amount), while agents report on a net basis (only their commission or fee). This difference can significantly impact your financial statements.
A clear understanding of these varying roles within a single contract is paramount for accurate financial reporting and adhering to standards like ASC 606 and IFRS 15. For businesses dealing with high-volume transactions and complex contracts, this nuanced approach can quickly become a burden. Automating your revenue recognition process with a solution like HubiFi can significantly reduce the risk of misclassification and ensure compliance. Schedule a demo to see how HubiFi can simplify your revenue recognition.
Misclassifying a company's role as principal or agent can have serious repercussions:
Financial Statement Inaccuracies: Incorrect classification can lead to overstated or understated revenue, potentially misleading investors and other stakeholders.
Regulatory Scrutiny: Misclassification may attract attention from regulatory bodies like the SEC, potentially leading to investigations or fines.
Audit Issues: Auditors may flag misclassifications, leading to restatements of financial reports and potential damage to the company's reputation.
Strategic Decision-Making Errors: Inaccurate revenue figures can lead to poor business decisions based on flawed data.
Tax Implications: In some jurisdictions, the principal-agent classification can affect tax liabilities, potentially leading to underpayment or overpayment of taxes.
To avoid these consequences, companies should invest in robust processes for assessing their role in each transaction. This might include regular reviews of contracts, ongoing staff training, and leveraging technology solutions to assist in the classification process.
By understanding these challenges and potential pitfalls, businesses can take proactive steps to ensure accurate revenue recognition and maintain the integrity of their financial reporting.
Ensuring accurate revenue recognition isn't just about understanding the rules—it's about implementing robust processes and leveraging the right tools. Here are some actionable steps to keep your revenue recognition on point:
Consistency is key when it comes to revenue recognition. Set up a routine to regularly review your contracts and transactions:
Implement a Contract Review Process: Establish a systematic approach to review new and existing contracts. This helps identify any changes in performance obligations or pricing that could affect revenue recognition.
Conduct Periodic Audits: Schedule internal audits to ensure your revenue recognition practices align with the latest standards. This proactive approach can catch potential issues before they become problems during external audits.
Stay Updated on Industry Changes: Revenue recognition rules can evolve. Make it a priority to stay informed about any updates to ASC 606 or IFRS 15 that might affect your industry.
While understanding the cash flow between parties is helpful in analyzing their relationship, it's not the deciding factor when determining principal vs. agent status. The real linchpin? Control. Cash flow considerations are secondary to who actually controls the goods or services before they reach the customer.
Think of it this way: a company might collect payment from a customer (the cash flow), but if they're simply passing that payment on to the actual provider of the good or service, they're likely acting as an agent. Control means having the ability to direct the use of the asset and obtain its benefits. This includes things like being primarily responsible for fulfilling the order, bearing the inventory risk, and setting the price.
So, while analyzing the flow of cash is a piece of the puzzle, focus on identifying who holds the reins. If your entity controls the good or service before it gets to the customer, you're the principal. If not, you're likely the agent. This core principle holds true under both ASC 606 and IFRS 15.
In today's complex business environment, manual processes just don't cut it. Here's how technology can streamline your revenue recognition:
Automate the Five-Step Model: Use software that can automate the five-step revenue recognition model. This ensures consistency and reduces the risk of human error.
Integrate Systems: Connect your CRM, ERP, and accounting software to create a seamless flow of data. This integration provides a holistic view of your contracts and transactions, making it easier to track performance obligations and recognize revenue accurately.
Utilize Advanced Analytics: Employ analytics tools to gain insights into your revenue patterns and identify any anomalies that might indicate recognition issues.
Consider Specialized Solutions: Platforms like HubiFi offer tailored revenue recognition solutions for high-volume businesses. These tools can automate complex calculations, ensure compliance, and provide real-time visibility into your revenue streams.
By combining regular reviews with cutting-edge technology, you'll not only ensure compliance but also gain valuable insights into your business's financial health. Remember, accurate revenue recognition isn't just about following rules—it's about painting a true picture of your company's performance.
Managing revenue recognition effectively can feel like a juggling act, especially for high-volume businesses. Staying compliant with ASC 606 and IFRS 15 while keeping your financial reporting accurate requires careful balancing. That's where HubiFi's automated revenue recognition solutions come in. We designed them to simplify this process and give you greater control over your financial data.
Manual processes are prone to errors and can bottleneck your business's growth. As highlighted in HubiFi's guide, Accurate Revenue Recognition: Practical Steps, using software to automate the five-step revenue recognition model is key for consistency and risk reduction. HubiFi's platform integrates seamlessly with your existing CRM, ERP, and accounting software, creating a unified data flow. This gives you a comprehensive view of your contracts and transactions, making it easier to track performance obligations and recognize revenue accurately.
For businesses with a large volume of transactions, ensuring compliance can be daunting. KSM's insights emphasize how important technology solutions are for streamlining compliance and minimizing misclassification risks. HubiFi offers tailored solutions specifically for high-volume businesses. Our tools automate complex calculations, ensuring compliance with ASC 606 and IFRS 15, and provide real-time visibility into your revenue streams. This simplifies compliance and empowers you to make informed strategic decisions based on accurate, current data.
Ready to see how automated revenue recognition can change your business? Schedule a demo with HubiFi today to learn how we can simplify compliance, improve accuracy, and provide deeper insights into your financial performance. You can also explore our pricing options and find more information about our solutions on the HubiFi blog.
Understanding the nuances of principal versus agent roles in revenue recognition is more than an accounting exercise—it's a crucial aspect of financial transparency and business integrity. By grasping these concepts, you're not just complying with standards; you're gaining deeper insights into your business model and financial performance.
Remember, the key lies in assessing control. Are you steering the ship, or just helping navigate? Your answer shapes how you report revenue and, ultimately, how the world perceives your business's financial health.
As you move forward, keep these points in mind:
By doing so, you'll not only ensure compliance but also build a foundation for more accurate financial reporting and strategic decision-making. In the complex world of revenue recognition, knowledge truly is power—and now you're equipped to wield it effectively.
We’ve established that the principal-agent relationship is key to revenue recognition. But this dynamic isn’t static; it's constantly evolving, especially with the rise of AI. The relationship between a business owner (the principal) and their employees (the agents) has always had its complexities. Now, add in artificial intelligence performing tasks, making decisions, and even generating revenue, and things get even more interesting. This is where the principal-agent problem really takes on a new dimension.
The principal-agent relationship is a cornerstone of many business interactions. A principal hires an agent to perform tasks on their behalf—ideally, with the agent acting in the principal's best interest. However, conflicts can arise when their interests don’t align. Traditional examples include a CEO (agent) prioritizing short-term profits over long-term value for shareholders (principals), or a real estate agent (agent) pushing a quick sale rather than getting the best price for the seller (principal). This inherent tension requires careful management and clear communication.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning are transforming the principal-agent dynamic. Automated systems, particularly in finance, introduce what's known as "knowledge risk." Even the programmers who build these systems may not fully grasp how the AI arrives at its decisions. This opacity makes it harder to address the classic principal-agent problem. How can you ensure the AI (agent) is acting in your (the principal’s) best interest if you don’t fully understand its decision-making process? This lack of transparency can erode trust and create new challenges for oversight and accountability. For financial professionals, this adds another layer of complexity to ensuring accurate and compliant reporting.
Emerging technologies like blockchain and decentralized finance (DeFi) offer potential solutions to these new complexities. Smart contracts, for example, automate agreements and reduce the need for intermediaries, minimizing potential conflicts and boosting trust in transactions. By encoding agreements in immutable code, blockchain can create a more transparent and accountable system for both principals and agents. This can be particularly relevant for businesses dealing with high-volume transactions where maintaining transparency is paramount.
Regulators are also stepping up to address the challenges posed by AI in finance. There's a growing push for "explainable AI," aiming to make AI decision-making more transparent. This is essential for protecting the interests of principals in an increasingly automated world. As regulations evolve, businesses will need to adapt and prioritize transparency in their AI-driven processes. This not only helps maintain compliance but also fosters trust with customers and stakeholders. Solutions like those offered by HubiFi, which focus on data transparency and integration, can be valuable assets in navigating this evolving regulatory landscape. Schedule a demo to learn more.
What's the main difference between a principal and an agent in revenue recognition?A principal has control over goods or services before they're transferred to the customer and recognizes revenue on a gross basis. An agent facilitates the sale of goods or services controlled by another party and recognizes revenue on a net basis, typically as a commission or fee.
How do I determine if my company is acting as a principal or an agent?Assess your level of control over the goods or services before they're transferred to the customer. Key indicators include primary responsibility for fulfillment, inventory risk, and pricing discretion. If you have control, you're likely acting as a principal; if not, you're probably an agent.
What are the financial implications of misclassifying as a principal or agent?Misclassification can lead to overstated or understated revenue, inaccurate financial ratios, and potential regulatory issues. It can also result in audit problems and may affect strategic decision-making based on flawed financial data.
How often should I review my company's principal vs. agent classifications?Regular reviews are crucial. Conduct assessments whenever you enter new contracts, change business models, or experience significant shifts in your industry. At minimum, perform an annual review to ensure ongoing compliance with revenue recognition standards.
Can technology help with principal vs. agent classification and revenue recognition?Absolutely. Advanced software solutions can automate the classification process, integrate with your existing systems, and provide real-time analytics. Tools like those offered by HubiFi can streamline revenue recognition, ensure compliance, and offer valuable insights into your financial data.
Former Root, EVP of Finance/Data at multiple FinTech startups
Jason Kyle Berwanger: An accomplished two-time entrepreneur, polyglot in finance, data & tech with 15 years of expertise. Builder, practitioner, leader—pioneering multiple ERP implementations and data solutions. Catalyst behind a 6% gross margin improvement with a sub-90-day IPO at Root insurance, powered by his vision & platform. Having held virtually every role from accountant to finance systems to finance exec, he brings a rare and noteworthy perspective in rethinking the finance tooling landscape.
Copyright © 2025 HubiFi | All rights reserved.
