Cone vs FigsFlow: Breaking Down the Key Differences
In today’s competitive accounting landscape, outdated proposals and poorly drafted engagement letters no longer meet the expectations of clients. Whether you are a solo accountant or a growing accounting practice, you need sharp and efficient proposals and engagement letters.
That is where software like FigsFlow and Cone come into play. Both platforms help with proposals, pricing, engagement letters, and client onboarding, but they take different approaches.
So, which platform is better suited to the needs of modern accountants?
We assessed FigsFlow and Cone using a range of practical criteria tailored to the day-to-day needs of accountancy firms. These included:
- Core Purpose
- User Interface (UX)
- Team Collaboration & Workflows
- Customer Support & Product Evaluation
- Pricing Plans & Affordability
- Client Experience
- Ratings & Testimonials
Thus, we can deliver an objective look at the strengths and weaknesses of both and tell you which one may be able to fulfil your needs.
Product Overview: Cone vs FigsFlow
Before we get into the detailed comparison, here is a brief overview of the two platforms.
With a general sense of what each platform is, let us now take a closer look at their underlying philosophies and how they serve accountants, bookkeepers and tax advisers.
Which Tool Best Meets the Needs of Accountants?
FigsFlow is built around a simple but powerful principle: accountants, bookkeepers, and tax advisers should not have to choose between compliance and convenience. The platform is designed to deliver both.
FigsFlow excels in this area with a sleek design, thanks to the dedicated FigsFlow design team. Feature placements are well-thought-out, and related features are grouped together within each module for smooth navigation.
At FigsFlow, our mission is to offer a truly all-in-one solution that goes far beyond basic template customisation. We have developed a system that not only manages proposals but tracks client onboarding and enables team collaboration through task assignment. It is everything we wish we have when working everyday.
-Raju Gajurel, CEO & Founder of FigsFlow
Cone, meanwhile, approaches the challenge from a broader angle. It focuses on simplicity and ease of use across multiple sectors. While it performs well as a general proposal tool, its approach lacks the specificity and regulatory awareness that accounting firms often require.
Which Tool Has Better User Interface?
FigsFlow presents a clean interface with a sleek and well-organised layout. Features are sensibly grouped into modules, making the navigation feel more natural. The setup process is designed to tailor the platform to your specific requirements, ensuring a personalised experience from the outset.
Here’s a look at FigsFlow’s dashboard.
Cone also offers a user-friendly experience with a modern design and straightforward navigation. However, its interface feels more generic, and it typically requires additional setup and manual adjustments to match the specific needs of accountancy firms.
We assessed both platforms across various devices and service delivery stages. Here’s the result.
The results clearly favoured FigsFlow, particularly in terms of logical layout and user flow. FigsFlow offers streamlined UI, enabling faster onboarding and more productive usage.
Which Tool is Better for Creating & Sending Proposals?
With FigsFlow, generating a proposal is as simple as selecting “Generate Proposal” from the home dashboard. From there, users can build multiple service packages, insert custom variables, and tailor proposal content to specific client types. The result is a polished, fully customised proposal in just a few minutes. No wonder it markets itself as the best Proposal Software for Accountants (CPA).
FigsFlow also provides additional features like automated reminders for client follow-ups, status updates for proposal signings and the ability to configure email templates for client communication.
Cone offers a comparable proposal workflow, though with notable limitations. The number of templates available is limited, and the wording often lacks the precision required by accountancy firms.
One interesting difference is how each system handles proposal revisions. While FigsFlow enables users to revive lost proposals, Cone allows active proposals to be recalled and edited mid-process. This functional divergence perhaps reflects the platforms’ differing priorities: one focused on continuity and compliance, the other on flexibility.
Which Tool is Better for Creating & Automating Engagement Letters?
FigsFlow allows you to choose from a range of LOE (Letter of Engagement) templates aligned with the requirements of major accounting bodies and customise specific wordings and clauses in real time within the live preview window.
Once the template is customised as per your unique needs, you can click on the Generate Proposal and proceed with pricing services. FigsFlow will automatically generate a single proposal and multiple engagement letters based on the services offered and the companies involved.
You can also generate and finalise LOEs without creating a full proposal letter by clicking on LOE only.
Meanwhile Cone offers a highly customisable template library for LOE like FigsFlow. However, only few templates are available and lacks consideration for specific requirements of regulatory bodies.
Like FigsFlow, you can edit engagement letter templates by simply duplicating the original and use real time preview to see the changes instantly. I found this feature helpful in both FigsFlow and Cone.
However, if you want to send just the engagement letter in Cone, you need to work around and create a separate service, price it at zero and send it. This doesn’t look appealing.
Which Tool is Better for Pricing?
FigsFlow simplifies pricing your accountancy services by automating rates based on the industry standards, including pay scales for associates, senior partners, junior partners and other accounting professionals. These settings are highly customisable and can be tailored to meet your specific needs.
In addition to this, it features manual adjustment and discounting for flexibility. You can manually adjust the pricing, apply discounts, and set VAT percentages in real-time.
Once satisfied, accountants can preview the pricing breakdown and move ahead to final confirmation. All this can be done within a minute, if not less.
Cone also offers similar approach to pricing by allowing users to edit service rates directly within the proposal letter. You can add multiple services, adjust unit pricing for each, modify quantities, and apply discount rates manually.
However, it has certain limitations compared to advanced systems like FigsFlow.
Unlike FigsFlow, Cone lacks real-time pricing updates and thus requires you to scroll up and down across the proposal to check the updated total. Also, it lacks flexible VAT rates within the proposal and requires extra hassle for zero-rated and reduced-rated services.
Where FigsFlow has extensive database of 100+ preset accounting services, Cone offers small range of templates and thus calculates prices based on standard rates for limited selection of services.
Cone vs FigsFlow on My Wallet
Let us now consider one of the most pressing concerns for any firm: which software offers better value for money?
FigsFlow operates on a four-tier pricing structure, ranging from £8 per month to £120 per month in its yearly plan.
The starter plans with its 1 user access and 10 proposal per month limitation is best suited for firms with basic needs and minimal transactions.
Firms with higher transaction volumes can opt for standard and professional packages which allows multiple user access and unlimited proposal per month.
All these packages come with onboarding support. However, only the standard and professional tier packages support dedicated customer support and relationship manager to assist with any issues.
Cone, meanwhile, offers two plans: the Essentials plan at £8 per month and the Growth plan at £11 per month in its annual plan.
FigsFlow’s full pricing can be checked out here while Cone’s can be analysed here.
Which Tool Has Better Integration with Accounting Tools & Apps?
There is little use for an onboarding software that fails to integrate with your core systems, especially your CRM?
FigsFlow offers integration with HubSpot! This makes it easy to import client contacts directly into the platform, eliminating the need to constantly switch between apps.
Cone offers a broader range of integrations with popular accounting tools such as QuickBooks Online (QBO), Xero, Zoho, Stripe, and others. However, it lacks direct HubSpot integration, even on its premium plan.
While FigsFlow currently leads with its CRM connectivity, Cone has the advantage when it comes to synchronising with widely used bookkeeping and payment platforms.
On balance, this one is too close to call. Each platform has its strengths, depending on the systems your firm relies on.
Which Tool is Better for Ensuring Regulatory Compliance?
For accountancy firms, regulatory compliance is non-negotiable. The software you choose must align with the standards set by professional bodies and legal frameworks.
FigsFlow has been developed to help accountants, bookkeepers and tax advisers ensure compliance in their proposal and engagement letter generation – no ifs, buts or ands. Its templates for proposals and engagement letters are fully aligned with the requirements of key regulatory bodies across the UK and beyond.
This built-in compliance provides reassurance to practices (like accounting) working under strict professional regulations.
Cone, meanwhile, is a generalist tool aimed at a broad user base. A review of its website and product documentation revealed no references to compliance with professional accounting bodies.
This omission may simply reflect the fact that Cone serves many users in unregulated sectors. However, this lack of explicit compliance support is a potential red flag for accountancy firms.
Which Tool Provides Better for Collaboration Among Accountants?
Efficient team collaboration is essential for firms managing multiple users and complex workflows. Both FigsFlow and Cone offer role-based access, but the depth of control varies significantly.
FigsFlow provides comprehensive multi-user access, enabling administrators to assign roles to individual users. Beyond standard role allocation, FigsFlow allows granular control over four core permissions — create, read, update and delete — across all modules. This high level of configurability supports effective task delegation, enhances team productivity and mitigates the risk of unauthorised changes.
Cone also includes role-based access through three predefined user roles: Admin, Standard User, and Restricted User. However, it lacks the same level of detailed permission management found in FigsFlow. This may be sufficient for general use, but firms requiring strict access controls and clear lines of responsibility may find Cone less suitable.
Which Tool Offers Reliable & Responsive Customer Support?
Reliable customer support is a critical factor when adopting any software, particularly for professionals who depend on timely technical assistance.
FigsFlow offers support via live chat, email, and onboarding sessions. Although the live chat function is accessible from the main interface, agent availability is not always guaranteed. In a recent test, a support query submitted via the chat feature received a helpful response after a wait of approximately 7.5 hours. FigsFlow supplements direct support with an extensive library of user resources, including articles and video guides.
In Cone, accessing support requires navigating to the “Need Help” section within the user settings. Once initiated, users interact with an live agent. In testing, this method produced a helpful response within 5 hours and 21 minutes.
Cone also provides email and in-app support, with documented average response times of 24 to 48 hours, depending on the subscription tier. Overall, Cone’s support response was faster and more accessible, though the absence of supplementary learning resources may be a consideration for some users.
What Do the Customers Say?
Customer reviews provide insight into user satisfaction and product reliability. These are especially useful for evaluating less tangible aspects such as ease of use, responsiveness and perceived value.
FigsFlow maintains a strong reputation across third-party review platforms:
On the other hand, Cone does not appear to have publicly available ratings on Trustindex, and Trustpilot. However, it maintains strong reputation over Google with G2 review of 5.0/5 as per 15 reviews. The number is not much which limits external validation of the software’s qualify and may be a point of concern for firms.
Do They Evolve & Specialise for Accountants?
FigsFlow has undergone significant development since its inception. It now includes over 100 pre-built templates supporting services such as statutory accounts, share transfers, bookkeeping, and audits. FigsFlow also provides templates aligned with emerging regulatory frameworks such as Making Tax Digital (MTD IT) and ACSP verification, underscoring its commitment to staying ahead of industry changes.
What this means is FigsFlow continues to evolve to provide both what accountants, bookkeepers and tax advisers need today and may need tomorrow.
Meanwhile, Cone positions itself as a generalist solution, offering flexible templates suitable for a variety of sectors. While this broad appeal allows for customisation, it does not include pre-configured workflows or templates tailored to regulated industries like accountancy. For firms requiring tools that integrate directly with compliance obligations, this may limit Cone’s practical utility.
What About Other Unique Features Relevant to Accountants?
As an accountant myself, I value following the key aspects in any proposal and engagement letter software:
- Ease of document generation
- Ease of pricing services
- Speed
- Regulatory compliance
- Graphics
FigsFlow excel at first four areas. The entire process from service packaging and pricing to generating proposal and engagement letter comes with built-in templates and takes less than a minute. Plus, FigsFlow’s templates are aligned with regulatory and professional standards across multiple Jurisdictions, and thus it excels at both the speed and the compliance.
However, when it comes to graphics and visual presentation, Cone stands out. While FigsFlow allows customisable and sleek templates, Cone takes it a step farther with premium aesthetics.
Cone & FigsFlow: Checklist for Decision-Making
The Wiser Choice
Both FigsFlow and Cone offer capable solutions for automating the creation of proposals, engagement letters, and related templates. Each has strengths that may appeal to different user groups.
However, when assessing the platforms through the lens of an accounting, bookkeeping or tax advisory practice, FigsFlow distinguishes itself as the more suitable platform. It offers a targeted suite of tools designed with regulatory requirements in mind, supported by extensive template libraries and advanced user permission controls. These features collectively enhance both operational efficiency and compliance assurance.
While Cone remains a viable option for users seeking a flexible, design-oriented platform, its generalist approach and limited accounting-specific functionality may not fully meet the specialised needs of accountancy firms.
FAQs
FigsFlow is the best proposal software. It offers built-in, regulatory-compliant templates, branding options, value-based pricing tools and a user-friendly interface, among other valuable features.
FigsFlow can be the perfect alternative to Cone especially if you are accountant or tax professionals. While Cone caters to the need for multiple industries, it lacks specialisation and depth accountants need. FigsFlow on the other hand feature 100+ regulatory compliant templates and easy engagement and proposal workflow tailored to the needs of accountants.
Yes, FigsFlow offers fully ACCA-compliant engagement letters. In fact, you can select from a range of regulatory bodies, including ICAEW, ACCA, CIMA, ATT, and more, to ensure compliance with the professional body that governs your sector.
You can use FigsFlow and Cone concurrently, if that is what you mean. However, since the two software serve different types of service providers, it is best to stick with FigsFlow if you are an accountant, tax adviser or bookkeeper. For freelancers, Cone offers great value.
Some top alternatives to FigsFlow includes FigsFlow, Ignition, Better Proposals and Panda Doc. While most of these software offers generic tools and templates, FigsFlow stand out with specialist feature including regulatory-compliant templates, real-time pricing adjustments and smooth client onboarding.
Sandeep Subedi
Sandeep is a rising finance professional with a sharp eye for numbers and a passion for turning complex tax rules into simple and smart solutions. Currently pursuing an ACCA qualification, he specialises in helping businesses stay regulatorily compliant.
English 
English (UK)