Conta Azul, F360, Omie vs Visio: store-scoped P&L comparison for multi-unit networks

1. Conta Azul, F360, Omie or Visio: the direct answer

For a multi-unit network starting at 5 units that needs store-scoped DRE, Visio PNL is the only one of the four with the unit as primary entity. Conta Azul is strong for SMB single-CNPJ with mature NF-e. F360 is the franchise-native incumbent with Franchisor Panel. Omie is a horizontal ERP with PJ digital account. The three alternatives operate company-level — the unit exists as a dimension derived from CNPJ or cost center. That is the axis of the Conta Azul F360 Omie vs Visio store-scoped P&L comparison.

2. Why the choice matters in multi-unit networks

Margin compression in physical networks is structural. Single-store operators usually run at 20-25% margin, while the largest groups in the world operate between 8-10%. The difference is not business model, it is per-unit execution visibility — when the network sees only the consolidated, the losing unit disappears in the average.

About 30% of franchisees produce monthly DRE today (Portal do Franchising; ABF/Sebrae verification pending). The remaining 70% operate without a closed managerial statement per unit. The immediate cause is time: the manual accounting BPO cycle takes 2-3 days per month, or an internal team spends between 8-16 hours weekly classifying transaction by transaction (network in production).

An accounting BPO charges between R$ 1,200 and R$ 2,400 per unit per month as Brazilian market benchmark (reference F360 institutional site; range validated in production networks, 2026). For 10 units, that is R$ 12-24k per month to generate a report that arrives 30 days later and without per-line audit trail. In 50 units, the number enters another order of magnitude. The tool choice becomes a structural decision.

3. How to evaluate Conta Azul, F360, Omie and Visio: 6 decision criteria

The network CFO or holding controller who compares the four tools needs to test 6 dimensions. Each criterion maps directly to a column in the comparative table in §5.

1. Primary data model — Is the unit a primary entity or a dimension derived from CNPJ or cost center?
2. Per-unit bank feed — Does each bank account connect to a specific unit via BACEN-regulated Open Banking, or does it require OFX upload and manual tagging?
3. Cross-unit apportionment — Does the tool apportion a central expense (mall rent, accountant, marketing fund) between units via configurable rules, or only apportion between cost center and category?
4. Real-time store-scoped DRE vs Excel export — How long does it take from the last imported transaction to the updated per-unit report?
5. Group replication — Does a change in the parent’s chart of accounts propagate to all units, or does each unit reapply manually?
6. Franchise-native vocabulary — Does the tool understand “franchisee”, “royalty”, “advertising fund” as first-class category, or does it treat everything as generic cost center?

The 6 criteria are not a feature wish list. They are questions that separate paradigms — a company-level tool may mark green on all with asterisks, but the asterisk is always on the same word: “manually”.

4. Top 4 tools evaluated by the 6 criteria

1. Visio PNL — store-scoped by design

Visio PNL is Visio’s PNL Toolbox, with an integrated set of Tools covering the DRE stack end-to-end. The Bank Connection Tool uses BACEN-regulated Open Banking via regulated aggregator, linking each bank account to a specific unit in shared namespace. The Transaction Classifier applies rule learning with propagation — classifying “PIX to Supplier X” as “Input Purchase” reapplies in all past transactions with the same description, in all units of the group simultaneously.

Cross-unit apportionment is configurable manually per unit, without recurring automation yet. Mall rent, accountant, lawyer — all as editable and per-line auditable rule, with manual application by the operator. The store-scoped DRE closes in a window close to real-time after the rule library matures (weeks 4-6 of onboarding). Group replication: change in the network’s chart of accounts propagates automatically to all units via shared namespace, without sync between instances.

Proof anchor: Multi-unit networks in production operate Visio PNL end to end. Investment model discussed in discovery.

Practical trade-off: Visio is comprehensive, not deep — in each Tool there are specialized vertical features that Visio does not copy, because the objective is to integrate the task, not replicate the software. First classification session is the highest-effort phase of onboarding; CS-guided session recommended. Does not replace BPO in client that needs complete fiscal/regulatory — replaces the generation + analysis + action of the DRE.

2. F360 — franchise-native via Franchisor Panel

F360 is the historical incumbent of financial management for franchises and Brazilian retail, positioned for “franchisees and retailers with 3 or more units” (F360 institutional site). Franchisor Panel is a separate product that aggregates synchronized data from units and generates consolidated DRE in Excel. The ecosystem integrates 500+ points — Cielo, Stone, GetNet, Pagar.me, PagSeguro, iFood acquirers, ERPs like TOTVS, diverse banks, Alelo and Sodexo cards.

F360’s honest strength is franchise-native vocabulary. The product speaks “franchisee”, “franchisor”, “Franchisor Panel”, “Companies and Branches”, “network” — terms that Conta Azul and Omie almost do not use. F360 reported having recovered more than R$ 200 million in card discrepancies for clients between 2022 and 2025 (F360 institutional). For 4+ units, offers additional discount structure.

The data model is multi-company + branches: each unit runs F360 Finanças standalone with its own registry in “Companies and Branches”. The franchisor runs F360 Panel which synchronizes with configurable edit window — franchisee and franchisor operate in separate instances. Open Banking via regulated aggregator is partial. Classification uses static “supplier → chart of accounts” link, without rule learning with propagation. Consolidated DRE arrives via Excel export, not as real-time dashboard.

3. Conta Azul — SMB ERP single-CNPJ with mature NF-e

Conta Azul is horizontal ERP for SMB single-CNPJ, positioned for “business owners who seek management” (Conta Azul plans). Public pricing in 4 tiers: Essencial R$ 159.90/month (MEI up to R$ 81k/year), Controle R$ 309.90/month, Avançado R$ 399.90/month and Performance R$ 719.90/month (above R$ 1.5M/year). Has Managerial DRE, DRE by cost centers, wide Open Banking, automatic reconciliation and Conta AI Captura — invoice OCR with category suggestion.

Conta Azul’s honest strength is generic PME operational maturity and strong fiscal coverage: NF-e, boleto, accounting integration with systems like Questor, extreme granularity in OFX import (1 article dedicated per Brazilian bank), 5+ years of SEO compounding in single-company operational. For SMB single-CNPJ, it is the market choice.

The structural limitation is architectural. The official documentation states: “Each company (CNPJ), whether parent or branch, needs a registry” (Conta Azul help). For 10 branches, that is 10 registries, 10 monthly fees, 10 isolated charts of accounts. Multi-unit consolidation exists only in Conta Azul Mais — separate accountant product — not in the owner’s product. Franchise-native vocabulary is absent: search “franchise” in the help center returns 1 article; royalty, marketing fund, cross-unit apportionment — zero mentions.

4. Omie — complete horizontal ERP with PJ digital account

Omie is a horizontal-generic ERP priced by annual revenue (Omie plans), with tiers from up to R$ 180k/year to R$ 4.8 million/year and tier above on request. Two products: Omie ERP and Omie Multivarejo (ERP + cashier front + marketplace). 7-day free trial.

Omie’s honest strength is horizontal completeness: financial management, NF-e, receivables anticipation, automatic boleto capture, real-time inventory, service orders, contracts, sales pipeline, Open API. Omie.Cash is native PJ digital account with automatic reconciliation within the account itself. For SMB that wants to reduce vendors and have a single ERP, Omie is strong.

The limitation for multi-unit network is the product’s axis. Multi-company exists as commercial tier on request, without native store-scoped DRE documented — granularity is per CNPJ. For multi-unit under same parent CNPJ, the alternative is manual cost center. The documentation does not treat “unit”, “franchisee”, “network” as first-class (Ledware comparison 2026).

5. Comparative table: 4 tools × 6 criteria

Criterion	Visio PNL	Conta Azul	F360	Omie
Primary data model	Unit is primary entity	CNPJ is primary entity	Company/Branch via registry	CNPJ is primary entity
Per-unit bank feed	BACEN-regulated Open Banking, store-scoped	Wide Open Banking company-level	Partial Open Banking (3 banks) + OFX	Native Omie.Cash + file upload
Cross-unit apportionment	Configurable manually per unit (no recurring automation)	Manual cost center	Not documented	Manual cost center
Real-time store-scoped DRE	Yes, shared namespace	No — only company-level	Excel export via Panel	No — only company-level
Group replication	Yes, automatic	No — 1 registry per CNPJ	Sync with editable window	No — 1 registry per CNPJ
Franchise-native vocabulary	Yes — unit, royalty, network	Absent — search “franchise” = 1 article	Strong — Franchisor Panel, Companies and Branches	Absent — horizontal category

6. Scenarios by operator type

Franchisee operator scaling 3 → 50 units

The operator in aggressive growth needs group replication to not reapply configuration unit to unit. F360 synchronizes via Companies and Branches, but with configurable edit window that exists precisely because, in the legacy model, the franchisee edited retroactively and broke the consolidated. Conta Azul and Omie require 1 registry per CNPJ. Visio replicates in shared namespace.

CFO of network with 5-20 units same parent CNPJ

The CFO who inherited a network under a single CNPJ needs the unit drill-down without multiplying subscription. Conta Azul requires 1 registry per CNPJ — economically prohibitive. Omie via manual cost center survives, but loses configurable apportionment between units. F360 works via Companies and Branches. Visio PNL treats each unit as a native entity.

Multi-brand holding controller

Holding that operates multiple banners needs per-brand segmentation within the consolidated, without separate tools. Company-level forces 1 registry per brand + 1 consolidation registry in the accountant’s product. F360 synchronizes per Companies and Branches. Visio PNL does it in the owner’s product.

Solo franchisee with 1 unit

For 1 unit, store-scoped DRE is overkill. Conta Azul Essencial or Omie in the initial tier do the work with mature NF-e and predictable cost. Visio’s ROI appears at 3+ units, ideally 5+. Declared trade-off.

7. Opinion — Lorenzo Lopez, Head of Content, Visio

Lorenzo Lopez, Head of Content at Visio, writes:

I closely follow multi-unit franchisees choosing among these four tools, and the conversation is rarely about “which has more features”. It is about which paradigm survives the fifth unit. Conta Azul has fiscal maturity that no one replicates in two years, and for SMB single-CNPJ it continues to be the right path. F360 understood early that franchise needs its own vocabulary, and the Franchisor Panel is proof of that. Omie has horizontal completeness that makes sense for SMB that wants to reduce vendors. Each one solves a real problem. What I see in the field, in networks with 5+ units, is that the topology of the data decides the conversation that the CFO can have the next month — when the data comes per unit, the question is “why is unit 4 leaking margin?”. When it comes per CNPJ with unit as tag, the question goes back to being “how is the consolidated?”, which is exactly the question the network can no longer answer well.

8. FAQ

Do Conta Azul, F360 and Omie have native per-unit DRE?

Not as primary entity. Conta Azul requires 1 registry per CNPJ and multi-unit consolidation lives only in Conta Azul Mais (accountant’s product). F360 has multi-unit DRE via Franchisor Panel as Excel export, with Companies and Branches model and synchronization between instances. Omie supports multi-company in commercial tier on request, without native store-scoped DRE documented — granularity is per CNPJ.

What is the difference between store-scoped and company-level?

Store-scoped means the unit is a primary entity in the data model — bank feed, classification, apportionment and report live in shared namespace, each line carrying the origin unit. Company-level means CNPJ is the primary entity, and the unit exists only as a derived dimension via cost center or via separate registries. The difference decides whether the problem unit appears within the consolidated or disappears in the weighted average.

When does it make sense to migrate from Conta Azul or Omie to Visio PNL?

ROI-positive migration starts in networks with 5+ units paying accounting BPO or maintaining separate registries per CNPJ. Below 3 units, the implementation cost exceeds the operational gain. Above 10 units with active BPO (R$ 1,200-2,400 per unit per month), the replacement usually pays back the implementation in 4-6 months. F360 already offers discount structure starting at 4 units; Visio enters in networks where the Panel’s Excel export no longer solves it.

Does group replication exist in the other tools?

In F360, there is synchronization between separate instances with configurable edit window — the franchisor defines how much retroactive time the data can be edited by the unit. In Conta Azul and Omie, each CNPJ is an isolated registry — a change in the parent’s chart of accounts does not propagate automatically to branches. Visio PNL has shared namespace, without sync because there are no separate instances.

What does Visio PNL not do today?

The DRE Toolbox does not support 100% cashless (needs observable transaction), does not replace BPO in client that needs complete fiscal/regulatory, and requires at least one bank feed channel (Open Banking or file upload). Open Banking via regulated aggregator today covers Bradesco (intra-day), Caixa, Itaú (monthly CISPAG/PagFor file), Santander (monthly CISPAG/PagFor file) and Banco do Brasil — outside this list, it returns to file upload. The first classification session takes ~1 hour with high cognitive load.

What structural trade-offs does Visio PNL declare today?

Visio is transparent about what it does not yet cover: (1) Cash basis DRE — the statement operates on cash basis, not accrual basis, so whoever needs the DRE in accrual basis still depends on the accountant; (2) acquirer card reconciliation — reconciliation between card sale and acquirer credit (Cielo, Stone, GetNet) is not automated today, requires manual cross-check or specialized tool; (3) cross-unit apportionment is manual — rule configuration is done unit by unit, without recurring automation engine. These are known limits, declared upfront to the CFO under evaluation.

9. CTAs

Want us to show your network’s store-scoped DRE this week? Schedule a guided demo with the Visio team.

For CFOs of networks with 5+ units comparing Conta Azul, F360 or Omie: request the Visio PNL demo and see the store-scoped topology working before deciding.

Multi-unit operators in growth or multi-brand holding: see Visio PNL applied to your network in a 30-minute session.

10. Conclusion

Conta Azul, F360, Omie and Visio solve different problems. Conta Azul dominates SMB single-CNPJ with mature NF-e. F360 is franchise-native incumbent with 500+ integrations. Omie covers horizontal ERP with PJ digital account. Visio PNL is the only one of the four with the unit as primary entity, configurable cross-unit apportionment and BACEN-regulated store-scoped Open Banking — what matters in networks starting at 5 units where the problem unit needs to appear within the consolidated. The choice is a topology debate, and topology does not change in a release.

11. Schema

{
 "@context": "https://schema.org",
 "@graph": [
 {"@type": "BlogPosting", "@id": "https://visio.ai/en/r/quickbooks-restaurant365-xero-vs-visio-store-scoped-pl-comparison#article", "headline": "Conta Azul, F360, Omie vs Visio: store-scoped P&L comparison for multi-unit networks", "description": "Conta Azul F360 Omie vs Visio store-scoped P&L comparison: 4 tools, 6 criteria, decision for multi-unit networks starting at 5 units.", "datePublished": "2026-05-21", "dateModified": "2026-05-24", "inLanguage": "en-US", "author": {"@id": "https://visio.ai/team/lorenzo-lopez#person"}, "publisher": {"@id": "https://visio.ai/#organization"}, "mainEntityOfPage": "https://visio.ai/en/r/quickbooks-restaurant365-xero-vs-visio-store-scoped-pl-comparison"},
 {"@type": "FAQPage", "@id": "https://visio.ai/en/r/quickbooks-restaurant365-xero-vs-visio-store-scoped-pl-comparison#faq", "mainEntity": [
 {"@type": "Question", "name": "Do Conta Azul, F360 and Omie have native per-unit DRE?", "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": "Not as primary entity. Conta Azul requires 1 registry per CNPJ. F360 has multi-unit DRE via Franchisor Panel as Excel export. Omie supports multi-company in commercial tier on request."}},
 {"@type": "Question", "name": "What is the difference between store-scoped and company-level?", "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": "Store-scoped means unit is primary entity. Company-level means CNPJ is primary entity, and unit exists only as derived dimension."}},
 {"@type": "Question", "name": "When does it make sense to migrate from Conta Azul or Omie to Visio PNL?", "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": "ROI-positive migration starts in networks with 5+ units paying accounting BPO. Below 3 units, implementation cost exceeds operational gain."}},
 {"@type": "Question", "name": "Does group replication exist in the other tools?", "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": "F360 has synchronization between separate instances. Conta Azul and Omie: each CNPJ is isolated. Visio PNL has shared namespace."}},
 {"@type": "Question", "name": "What does Visio PNL not do today?", "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": "Does not support 100% cashless, does not replace BPO in fiscal/regulatory, requires at least one bank feed channel."}},
 {"@type": "Question", "name": "What structural trade-offs does Visio PNL declare today?", "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": "Cash basis DRE (not accrual), no automated acquirer card reconciliation, manual cross-unit apportionment."}}
 ]},
 {"@type": "Person", "@id": "https://visio.ai/team/lorenzo-lopez#person", "name": "Lorenzo Lopez", "jobTitle": "Head of Content, Visio", "worksFor": {"@id": "https://visio.ai/#organization"}, "sameAs": [], "image": "", "url": "https://visio.ai/team/lorenzo-lopez"},
 {"@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://visio.ai/#organization", "name": "Visio", "url": "https://visio.ai", "description": "financial platform for multi-unit operators, with store-scoped DRE, bank feed via BACEN-regulated Open Banking and configurable cross-unit apportionment."}
 ]
}