GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Business FinanceTop 10 Best Approval Software of 2026
Top 10 approval software ranking with technical criteria and tradeoffs for teams choosing tools like Kissflow, Pipefy, and monday.com.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
Kissflow-1 is the strongest pick for governance-focused teams that need configurable approval routing with strong audit traceability, whereas monday.com-3 fits when approvals must live inside a work board with automation and API integration for faster day-to-day decisions.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Kissflow
Maker-checker style approvals with delegation controls that preserve decision accountability across reassignment events.
Built for fits when governance-focused teams need configurable approvals with strong audit traceability..
Pipefy
Editor pickWorkflow boards let approvals route via step-level rules tied to form fields, with decision history per process instance.
Built for fits when teams need visual workflow approvals with API and webhook integration into existing systems..
Monday.com
Editor pickBoard-native approval steps that update item status, ownership, and assignments with automation rules.
Built for fits when teams want approvals inside a work board with automation and API integration..
Related reading
Comparison Table
This comparison table benchmarks approval workflow tools such as Kissflow, Pipefy, monday.com, Wrike, and Filestage across integration support, automation options, and the API surface for custom approval logic. It also summarizes admin and governance controls like RBAC, provisioning, and audit log coverage, so teams can map each product to process throughput and approval governance needs.
Kissflow
enterpriseWorkflow automation platform with configurable approval routing.
Maker-checker style approvals with delegation controls that preserve decision accountability across reassignment events.
Kissflow uses structured request forms for capturing approval inputs, then routes each submission through an approver matrix that can change by conditions. Approval states and decision records are preserved for traceability, including the history of changes tied to a specific request. Automation can trigger downstream actions such as status updates and external calls when approvals complete or route conditions change.
A key tradeoff is that complex conditional routing and delegation policies require careful configuration to avoid misrouted approvals at scale. Kissflow fits teams that need governance-friendly workflow orchestration where business users define approval logic and IT enforces integrations.
- +Configurable approval routing rules support dynamic approver assignment
- +Delegation and reassignment options cover real-world absence scenarios
- +Webhook and API integrations support event-based workflow triggers
- +Audit visibility ties decisions to request-level lifecycle stages
- –Highly branched routing needs disciplined configuration review
- –Advanced integrations often require developer support for edge cases
- –Parallel approval requires additional design to keep outcomes unambiguous
Finance operations teams
Route spend approvals by policy
Fewer manual exceptions
Procurement teams
Enforce approvals on vendor onboarding
Consistent approval coverage
Show 2 more scenarios
IT operations teams
Control access-change approvals
Lower approval cycle time
Workflow actions notify external systems through API calls after approval decisions.
Operations leadership
Audit and track approval outcomes
Faster internal compliance checks
Decision records and history snapshots support review of who approved what and when.
Best for: Fits when governance-focused teams need configurable approvals with strong audit traceability.
More related reading
Pipefy
enterpriseProcess management platform with approval workflow automation.
Workflow boards let approvals route via step-level rules tied to form fields, with decision history per process instance.
Pipefy fits organizations that want approval routing rules tied to visual workflow stages rather than ticketing-only processes. It supports sequential and parallel approval patterns through step configuration, and it maintains an approval decision history tied to each process instance. Admin controls include role-based access to workspace permissions and process access, which helps limit who can submit, approve, or view records. Integrations cover common enterprise needs via webhooks and a REST API surface used to create, update, and monitor process instances.
A key tradeoff is that advanced approval policies often require careful workflow modeling across multiple steps, which can add build time for complex approval matrices. It is a good fit for change requests or procurement approvals where each decision needs structured fields and consistent routing. It is less ideal for teams that need fully native immutable event log exports or deep approval policy governance beyond process-level controls.
- +Configurable approval routing rules mapped to workflow steps
- +Form-based intake standardizes request data before approvals
- +Webhook and REST API support external systems and monitoring
- +Approver decisions stay attached to each process instance
- –Complex approver matrices can require multiple workflow layers
- –Immutable audit log export depth is limited versus governance-first tools
- –SLA timers and escalation behavior may need extra configuration
- –Cross-process policy governance depends on workspace conventions
Procurement operations teams
Purchase approvals from structured request forms
Fewer approval delays and rework
Finance operations teams
Sequential approval for expense policy exceptions
Consistent decisions across requests
Show 2 more scenarios
IT governance teams
Change requests with delegation paths
Maintained throughput during coverage gaps
Workflow steps allow reassignment when approvers are unavailable.
Customer operations teams
Parallel approvals for service credits
Faster settlements with traceability
Parallel decision steps collect outcomes tied to a single request instance.
Best for: Fits when teams need visual workflow approvals with API and webhook integration into existing systems.
Monday.com
SMBWork management platform with approval columns and automation recipes.
Board-native approval steps that update item status, ownership, and assignments with automation rules.
Approval tracking stays tied to each item as status, owner, and assignee fields evolve through the approval steps. The workflow engine supports conditional routing and parallel reviewer scenarios through rule-based automation, which reduces the need for custom approval routing logic. The audit trail is visible through change history on item activity, and attachments can be carried with the request for decision context.
A key tradeoff is that approval logic is modeled through board structures and automation rules rather than a dedicated, policy-centric approval schema. Teams that need strict approver matrix governance or high-volume approval throughput may need careful board design to avoid duplicated states and rule conflicts. Monday.com fits best when approvals are part of everyday work management and when request intake forms feed directly into the same execution workflow.
- +Approvals stay on the same board items as execution work
- +Rule-based automation updates statuses and notifies stakeholders
- +Attachments and decision context remain attached to the request
- +REST API and webhooks support approval lifecycle integration
- –Approval policy complexity can become hard to govern at scale
- –Parallel and conditional routing needs careful rule design
- –Audit visibility depends on board activity configuration
- –High-volume routing may require optimization of automation rules
Project operations teams
Approve change requests within project boards
Faster review cycles
Procurement teams
Route vendor document approvals to approvers
Clear decision record
Show 2 more scenarios
Finance operations teams
Enforce maker-checker approvals for invoices
Reduced approval lag
Submitted invoices progress through approval steps with automated notifications.
IT operations teams
Approve access requests with conditional routing
Correct routing every time
Automation sends items to the right approvers based on request fields.
Best for: Fits when teams want approvals inside a work board with automation and API integration.
Wrike
enterpriseProject management platform with integrated proofing and approval tools.
Approvals integrate directly into Wrike work items and timeline updates, keeping decision context linked to project execution.
Wrike is an approval workflow system that focuses on configurable routing across work items rather than a single approval form experience. Teams can define approval routing rules, capture decisions with an auditable record, and keep approvals tied to the underlying work for traceability.
The product supports workflow automation and connects with identity and integration surfaces used for business process orchestration. In practice, Wrike fits organizations that want approvals embedded into managed projects and work requests with consistent governance.
- +Approvals stay attached to work items, so status and history remain traceable
- +Routing rules support matrix-style decisioning with conditional paths
- +Automation triggers keep intake, assignment, and reminders aligned with workflow state
- +Audit history captures approval decision records tied to lifecycle changes
- –Approval routing configuration can require careful admin setup for complex rules
- –Request intake forms are less flexible than full form builders for edge cases
- –Parallel approval coordination needs deliberate modeling to avoid conflicting outcomes
- –Admin governance for large rule sets can become harder to reason about over time
Best for: Fits when teams need approvals embedded in managed work with rule-based routing and strong audit traceability.
Filestage
SMBReview and approval platform for creative content, documents, and video.
Inline review threads stay attached to specific files and approval steps, then roll into a decision history per request.
Filestage routes approval requests with document-centric review cycles, including inline comment threads and decision capture per step. Teams can run sequential or parallel routing with delegated reviews, then collect decisions into a searchable history of status changes.
The request intake supports structured fields that map to routing rules, so approvals start with the right metadata instead of freeform email chains. Filestage also integrates with common collaboration tools and provides an API surface for automating intake and syncing workflow state.
- +Approval steps include per-item decision records and comment context
- +Routing supports both parallel and sequential approval patterns
- +Delegation and reassignment reduce bottlenecks when approvers change
- +API supports automation of request creation and status tracking
- –Complex branching and matrices require more workflow design than simple linear flows
- –High-volume comment threads can feel slower to navigate than file-focused reviewers
- –Granular governance controls are not as extensive as enterprise workflow suites
- –Some integrations depend on external systems for file retrieval and indexing
Best for: Fits when marketing, creative, or ops teams need structured approvals with comment context and automation via API.
Ziflow
enterpriseOnline proofing and approval software for agencies and enterprises.
Dynamic request intake with data-driven routing rules that select approvers based on submitted field values, not a fixed approver list.
Ziflow manages approval workflows with a focus on dynamic forms and routing rules that adapt to submitted data. Request intake is built around configurable request types, approver matrices, and decision steps that support maker-checker style review.
The system tracks approval status through a documented audit trail with decision records and change history snapshots. Ziflow also integrates workflow actions with external systems through API and webhook callbacks for notification and downstream processing.
- +Routing rules can use request answers to select approvers
- +Approval status lifecycle records decisions and transitions
- +Audit trail includes decision records for compliance review
- +API and webhooks support workflow events in external systems
- –Complex branching needs careful workflow design to avoid dead ends
- –Role mapping and delegation require governance discipline
- –Large attachment sets can slow request visibility
- –SSO via SAML 2.0 may require IT support for rollout
Best for: Fits when teams need approval routing and review steps driven by request form answers without heavy custom coding.
PageProof
SMBOnline proofing and approval tool for digital and print content.
Page-specific review and decision capture for document production handoffs, designed around round-trip feedback on the same document version.
PageProof focuses on approvals tied to publishing and document markup, with a workflow designed around round-trips on specific pages and versions. The system supports structured request intake, routing decisions, and status tracking so teams can see what moved and what did not.
PageProof also provides auditability of approval actions and integrates with common document formats used in production handoffs. Automation and extension options are geared toward integrating approvals into existing editorial or document operations rather than replacing those systems end to end.
- +Page-level review workflow matches publishing and document markup needs
- +Approval status lifecycle and decision records are easy to follow
- +Supports practical request intake for routing approvals to specific work items
- +Document handling emphasizes production-friendly file formats for attachments
- –Advanced approval routing rules can require careful workflow design
- –Deep governance controls like SCIM user provisioning are limited in scope
- –Complex maker-checker controls are not as granular as in specialist systems
- –Integration depth for event streaming and callbacks is less extensive than top peers
Best for: Fits when publishing teams need version-specific page review with reliable approval traces.
QuickReviewer
SMBReview and approval tool for documents, images, and video.
Request intake and approval routing are designed around a reusable reviewer assignment workflow that preserves decision context across status changes.
QuickReviewer is an approval workflow tool built around structured request intake and reviewer assignment. It focuses on routing rules for approvals, status transitions, and an auditable decision trail tied to each request.
The product supports parallel and sequential review patterns, including delegation and reassignment during routing. QuickReviewer also provides notifications and integration hooks so approvals can progress based on events.
- +Approval routing supports parallel and sequential review paths
- +Delegation and reassignment keep workflows moving during absences
- +Decision history captures reviewer actions with request context
- +Notification hooks reduce manual follow-up for approvers
- –Conditional branching coverage is limited for complex policy matrices
- –Maker-checker controls are not granular per field or section
- –API surface details are thin for external status reconciliation
- –Role governance for approver matrices lacks administrator-wide preview tools
Best for: Fits when teams need configurable routing for approvals with delegation and an auditable decision trail.
zipBoard
vertical specialistReview and approval platform for web, e-learning, and digital content.
Delegation and reassignment controls inside routing reduce workflow rebuilds when approvers change.
zipBoard routes approval requests through configurable workflows that drive decision records from intake to final status. Teams can collect inputs via request forms, apply approver routing rules, and manage delegation for reassigning ownership.
The system keeps an audit trail of approval activity and decision history to support traceable outcomes. Integration options and automation hooks help connect approvals to upstream request sources and downstream business actions.
- +Configurable approval routing rules support varied approver matrices
- +Request intake forms reduce back-and-forth for required data
- +Audit trail records approval actions and decision history
- +Delegation enables reassignment without rebuilding workflows
- –Advanced branching needs careful workflow design to avoid complexity
- –API depth for external process orchestration is limited versus top tiers
- –Role and governance controls feel lighter than enterprise approval suites
- –Parallel approvals can be harder to reason about in long chains
Best for: Fits when mid-size teams need form-based approvals with delegation and clear decision history.
Cflow
SMBWorkflow automation software with visual approval flow building.
Conditional branching driven by request fields that changes the approver matrix on the fly.
Cflow is an approval workflow engine for teams that need structured routing from request intake to final decisions. It supports configurable approval routing rules, including sequential approval paths and conditional branching based on form inputs.
The system tracks an audit trail for each approval step and publishes decision records tied to the workflow instance. Cflow is best evaluated on how well its configuration and automation surface fit the organization’s approval policy enforcement and integration needs.
- +Configurable sequential approval paths reduce manual handoffs
- +Conditional branching on request fields supports policy-based routing
- +Audit trail captures approver actions per workflow instance
- +Clear approval status lifecycle supports operational follow-up
- –Routing rule complexity can create maintenance overhead
- –Limited visibility controls for fine-grained maker-checker governance
- –Webhook callbacks and REST API support need deeper documentation to assess
- –File attachment handling depends on accepted document formats
Best for: Fits when mid-size teams need form-driven approvals with conditional routing and step-level auditability.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 business finance, Kissflow stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right approval software
This buyer's guide covers how to evaluate approval workflow engines and request intake tools using ten named options: Kissflow, Pipefy, monday.com, Wrike, Filestage, Ziflow, PageProof, QuickReviewer, zipBoard, and Cflow.
The guide maps concrete selection criteria to real capabilities such as maker-checker approvals with delegation in Kissflow, step-level workflow boards in Pipefy, and board-native approval steps in monday.com.
Approval workflow software that routes requests from intake to decision records
Approval workflow software turns a submitted request into an approval routing sequence with decision records, status lifecycle changes, and an audit trail tied to each workflow instance. It replaces manual email back-and-forth by using rule-based routing, structured request inputs, and notification hooks so approvers can act and stakeholders can track outcomes.
Teams use these tools to enforce approval policy, handle delegations when approvers are unavailable, and keep decisions traceable to the underlying work. Kissflow and Pipefy show what this looks like when approvals run end-to-end from intake through completion with configurable routing rules and external integrations.
Decision-ready routing, auditability, and automation controls for approvals
Approval software succeeds when routing rules are deterministic and decision history stays readable after exceptions like delegation and reassignment. Evaluation should prioritize how approvals move through step logic, how decisions and audit visibility get captured, and how automation and integrations move workflow state into other systems.
These features also determine how well a tool can support sequential versus parallel approval patterns and complex conditional branching without turning policy changes into a maintenance burden.
Maker-checker approvals with delegation and reassignment controls
Kissflow preserves decision accountability across delegation and reassignment events using maker-checker style approvals with delegation controls tied to who ultimately makes the decision. This matters when an approver can change between request submission and final signoff without losing decision accountability.
Step-level workflow boards tied to form fields
Pipefy routes approvals via workflow steps that attach rules to process steps and form fields, then keeps decisions attached to each process instance. This matters when approval routing depends on specific intake data and when decision history must stay connected to the exact workflow stage that produced it.
Board-native approval steps that update work items
monday.com keeps approval steps inside board items so approvals update item status, ownership, and assignments using rule-based automation. This matters when approvals must stay synchronized with execution work rather than living in a separate workflow object model.
Approvals embedded in work items with timeline-linked traceability
Wrike integrates approvals directly into Wrike work items and timeline updates so status and history remain traceable to project execution. This matters when approval decisions must be reviewed alongside delivery timelines and when governance depends on work-item context staying attached.
Inline review threads and decision history per step
Filestage attaches inline comment threads to specific files and approval steps, then rolls those comments into a searchable decision history per request. This matters when review context must include who commented on what and which decision step the comment influenced.
Data-driven approver selection from dynamic request inputs
Ziflow selects approvers using request answers and routing rules that adapt to submitted field values rather than a fixed approver list. This matters when routing rules need to map request attributes to approver matrices without heavy custom coding.
Conditional branching that changes the approver matrix on the fly
Cflow can use conditional branching driven by request fields to change the approver matrix during routing. This matters when policies require different approvers based on submitted data and when routing must follow those conditions without building multiple separate flows.
Pick an approval engine by matching routing complexity to integration and governance needs
Selection starts with routing philosophy. Tools like Kissflow and Pipefy focus on configurable workflow rules and external integrations, while monday.com and Wrike keep approvals attached to work objects and execution contexts.
After routing philosophy, integration and governance determine how approvals get enforced and how decisions get reconciled elsewhere. The most reliable picks are the ones whose automation surface and audit trail model align with how the organization tracks requests and approvals.
Choose the workflow object model that matches how work gets executed
If approvals must live on the same work record as execution tasks, monday.com and Wrike keep approval steps attached to board items or work items with status and timeline traceability. If approvals must run as configurable request workflows from intake through decision completion, Kissflow and Pipefy treat approvals as their own workflow instances with routing rules attached to steps.
Match your routing rules to what the tool can model without rework
If routing depends on request attributes and approver selection must adapt dynamically, Ziflow routes based on submitted field values and Filestage maps structured fields to routing rules for document-centric review cycles. If routing depends on conditional step logic that changes the approver matrix during a single workflow run, Cflow provides conditional branching on request fields and Kissflow supports highly branched routing with disciplined configuration review.
Plan for delegation and reassignment as part of the policy, not a workaround
For organizations that expect maker-checker style accountability when owners change, Kissflow includes delegation and reassignment controls designed to preserve decision accountability. For lighter governance needs, Pipefy and QuickReviewer also support delegation and status-driven lifecycles, but long conditional matrices can still require careful modeling.
Validate integration and automation hooks against the way decisions must sync outward
If approvals must trigger actions in other systems using event-based callbacks and external triggers, Pipefy and Kissflow both support webhook and REST API integration for workflow events. If approvals must coordinate with work execution objects, monday.com and Wrike use automation to update downstream tasks and keep stakeholders aligned with workflow state.
Test audit traceability in the same scenario that creates exceptions
Use real exception cases such as delegation during maker-checker review to confirm that decision history stays readable and attributable. Kissflow ties audit visibility to request-level lifecycle stages, while Wrike captures audit history tied to lifecycle changes and Filestage rolls inline review context into decision history per step.
Estimate governance overhead by looking at how complex routing becomes maintainable
If routing can become highly branched, Kissflow requires configuration discipline for routing review and Cflow can create maintenance overhead when routing rule complexity grows. If governance needs stay mostly within step-level rules on a board, Pipefy workflow boards and PageProof page-specific review workflows reduce ambiguity by keeping decisions tied to specific process steps or document versions.
Approval workflow fit by governance goals, routing complexity, and content type
Different teams need different approval workflow shapes. Some teams require strong policy enforcement and audit traceability for delegation events, while others need board-native approvals that stay attached to execution work.
The best match is driven by what the approval must reference, such as work items, board objects, files with inline review context, or structured request forms.
Governance-first teams that need delegation-safe maker-checker decisions
Kissflow fits teams that want configurable approvals with strong audit traceability and maker-checker style approvals with delegation controls. This supports decisions that remain accountable across reassignment events when approvers become unavailable.
Ops and platform teams that want visual step workflows tied to intake fields
Pipefy fits teams that need workflow boards where routing rules attach to workflow steps and form fields. This supports decision history attached to each process instance while integrating decisions through webhook callbacks and REST API access.
Work management teams that want approvals embedded in execution boards and projects
monday.com fits teams that want approval steps on the same board items as execution work so automation updates statuses and assignments. Wrike fits teams that want approvals tied to work items and timeline updates so decision context stays linked to project execution.
Creative, marketing, and operations teams that must capture comment context per decision step
Filestage fits teams that need inline review threads attached to files and approval steps with decision history per request. PageProof fits publishing teams that need page-specific review and decision capture designed around round-trip feedback on the same document version.
Mid-size teams that rely on request fields to route reviewers with manageable workflow design
Ziflow fits teams that route approvals based on request form answers and choose approvers from dynamic request inputs. Cflow fits teams that need conditional branching driven by request fields to change the approver matrix on the fly.
Where approval deployments fail: routing ambiguity, governance gaps, and integration surprises
Approval tools break when routing logic becomes unclear, when delegation is treated as an afterthought, or when external system sync relies on hooks that are too thin for the use case. Several tools also show limits when teams attempt to govern large approval matrices or when parallel decisions require unambiguous modeling.
The goal is to select a workflow shape that aligns with decision accountability and the organization’s operational follow-up needs.
Designing complex branching without a configuration review process
Highly branched routing in Kissflow requires disciplined configuration review so decision outcomes stay unambiguous. Complex branching and conditional routing in Cflow can create maintenance overhead when routing rule complexity grows.
Assuming parallel approvals will remain unambiguous without deliberate modeling
Parallel approval in Kissflow requires additional design to keep outcomes unambiguous. Parallel and conditional routing in monday.com also needs careful rule design so approval policy complexity does not become hard to govern at scale.
Expecting governance-grade role and user provisioning controls without verifying scope
Deep governance controls like SCIM user provisioning are limited in scope in PageProof, which can be a blocker for strict enterprise user lifecycle management. Role governance for approver matrices has lighter administrator preview tools in QuickReviewer.
Overbuilding approval matrices with too many workflow layers
Pipefy complex approver matrices can require multiple workflow layers, which increases routing administration complexity. Wrike can become harder to reason about over time when admin governance for large rule sets increases.
Underestimating integration documentation needs for external orchestration
Cflow webhook callbacks and REST API support need deeper documentation to assess for external status reconciliation. Ziflow and Kissflow have API and webhook callbacks, but large attachment sets in Ziflow can slow request visibility during high-volume routing.
How We Selected and Ranked These Tools
We evaluated and rated ten named approval workflow tools on features, ease of use, and value, with features carrying the most weight at forty percent while ease of use and value each account for thirty percent. Each tool received criteria-based scoring grounded in how the workflow executes from request intake to decision completion, how routing rules and delegation behave, and how the audit trail and automation hooks support real operational follow-up.
Kissflow separated from lower-ranked tools because it combines maker-checker style approvals with delegation controls that preserve decision accountability across reassignment events, and it pairs that with webhook and API integration for event-based workflow triggers. That combination lifted Kissflow’s feature and governance-aligned scores more than tools that focus mainly on visual workflow boards or content-specific review cycles.
Frequently Asked Questions About approval software
How do approval tools handle request intake so routing rules get consistent inputs?
Which platforms provide REST API access and webhook callbacks for decision events?
How does maker-checker style approval work with delegation and reassignment?
What identity and access controls exist for user login and admin governance?
What breaks if an approval workflow needs conditional routing based on form inputs?
When should teams choose document-centric approvals versus task-board approvals?
How do tools keep audit history for approval steps and decision records?
Which platform best supports sequential versus parallel approval patterns?
How should a team migrate existing approval logic and decision history into a new workflow engine?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Business Finance alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of business finance tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare business finance tools→FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS
Not on this list? Let’s fix that.
Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.
Apply for a ListingWHAT THIS INCLUDES
Where buyers compare
Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.
Editorial write-up
We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.
On-page brand presence
You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.
Kept up to date
We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.