SpidNums vs Mango Practice Management: an honest comparison
A fair comparison for Canadian practices — what Mango Practice Management does well first, then where the two differ.
Mango Practice Management is a time-and-billing-centred practice management product for accounting and professional-services firms. SpidNums is the better fit when a Canadian firm wants flat USD $1,200-per-firm-per-year pricing, white-label branding on every plan, deadlines generated from Canadian rules rather than from generic recurring tasks, and client data hosted in Canada. Here is the honest breakdown.
What Mango Practice Management does well
This section comes first deliberately. Mango Practice Management is a serious product with real customers, and a comparison that pretends otherwise is not worth reading.
- Strong time-and-billing capability, which is the right centre of gravity for firms that genuinely bill hourly.
- Invoicing and payment collection built into the practice system rather than bolted on.
- A sensible fit for professional-services firms whose economics are hours-based.
Where the fit differs
These are differences in model rather than claims about missing features. Where a capability is not listed for Mango Practice Management, that means we did not verify it — not that it is absent.
- Centre of gravity: Mango is organized around time and billing. SpidNums is organized around deadlines and client work; it shows workload from real task data rather than running timesheets.
- Jurisdiction: SpidNums encodes Canadian filing rules; Mango is a US-market product.
- White-label: SpidNums presents the firm's brand across app, emails and letterhead.
- Pricing model: flat per firm versus per seat.
Pricing
Mango Practice Management does not publish pricing we could verify, so this page does not state a number for it — ask the vendor for a current quote. SpidNums is a flat USD $1,200 per firm per year with every feature included, including white-label branding.
Side by side
| Compared on | SpidNums | Mango Practice Management |
|---|---|---|
| Time tracking | Workload from real task data — no timesheets | Time-and-billing is the core of the product |
| Pricing model | Flat per firm | See vendor |
| Canadian deadline logic | CRA-native: T2 six-month clock and earlier balance-due date, GST/HST by client cadence, fiscal-year-end reminders | See vendor |
| White-label branding | Full white-label on every plan — app, emails and letterhead | See vendor |
| Data residency | Hosted in Canada (ca-central-1) | See vendor |
What SpidNums is, plainly
SpidNums is practice management for Canadian accounting firms: the client list, the services each client buys, the deadlines those services generate, the person who owns each one, and the engagement letter that defined the scope. It is not a general ledger, it does not prepare or transmit returns, and it does not calculate payroll — those stay in the tools your firm already files with.
The list below is the complete set of claims this site makes about the product. If a capability is not on it, we do not claim it.
- Multi-tenant white-label branding per firm — name, logo, colours, emails and letterhead
- Colour-coded SLA deadline dashboard ranked by proximity
- Aggregated reminders across tasks, service cadences and fiscal year-ends
- E-signed engagement letters with a public, no-login client portal
- Per-tenant Google Workspace integration
- Client portal
- Staff roles with confidential-client gating
- Canadian-hosted data (Supabase ca-central-1)
- Flat USD $1,200 per firm per year, all inclusive
- CSV/XLSX client import and export
Questions worth asking both vendors
Comparison grids converge because feature names converge. These six questions separate products that look identical on paper, and they are worth asking of Mango Practice Management and of SpidNums alike.
- How is a deadline generated — from a rule tied to the client's fiscal year-end and reporting period, or from a recurring task somebody configured by hand?
- When a client's filing cadence changes, is that one field or a rewrite of every future date?
- Whose brand does the client see on emails, on the portal and on a signed engagement letter — and on which plan does that become true?
- Where is client data hosted, and is tenant isolation enforced in the database or only in the application? Get the answer in writing.
- What is the total annual cost at three seats and at ten? Ask for the total, not the per-user figure.
- What comes across on migration, and what does not? Clients usually move; documents, notes and completed work usually do not.
Who should choose Mango Practice Management
A firm that bills by the hour and needs defensible timesheet data should choose a time-and-billing-first product like Mango. SpidNums deliberately does not run timesheets, and if hourly billing is your revenue model that is a real gap, not a philosophical difference.
If that describes your firm, take the other product seriously. If it does not, the practice management overview covers what SpidNums does in full.
Switching
Client lists import by CSV or XLSX. Time entries and invoice history do not migrate; if you bill hourly and are moving away from hourly, run both systems until the last hourly engagement closes.
SpidNums imports and exports clients as CSV or XLSX. There is no direct migration connector, so historical documents, notes and completed work do not come across automatically — plan the cutover around a period boundary rather than mid-season.
Frequently asked questions
Does SpidNums do time tracking?
Not timesheets. SpidNums shows live workload — clients handled and open tasks per staff member, computed from real work data — and capacity across the deadline board. If your firm bills by the hour and needs defensible time entries, pair it with a dedicated time system.
How much does Mango Practice Management cost?
We have not verified Mango's current pricing against a public source, so we do not quote a figure. Request a quote and compare on a total-firm basis, since per-seat and flat models diverge quickly as headcount grows.
Is Mango a good fit for Canadian firms?
It is a US-market product, so its compliance framing assumes US filing obligations. Its time-and-billing capability is jurisdiction-neutral and works fine anywhere; the gap for a Canadian firm is CRA-specific deadline logic.
What is the best alternative if I do not bill hourly?
If your firm prices fixed-fee engagements, a deadline-and-workflow platform serves you better than a time-and-billing product. SpidNums builds priced engagement letters from a services catalogue and tracks the work against Canadian deadlines at a flat firm price.