Cohiva Control vs Maintenance Connection: an honest comparison

Maintenance Connection, part of Accruent, and Cohiva Control are both computerised maintenance management systems, and they overlap on the maintenance basics. The difference is depth and direction: Maintenance Connection is an established enterprise CMMS with deep maintenance functionality, while Cohiva Control runs the maintenance core and then carries each asset through to its depreciation on your books. This page is honest about which buyer each suits, with no invented pricing or fabricated feature claims.

At a glance

Treat the right-hand column as category framing rather than a line-by-line audit of Maintenance Connection. Confirm current Maintenance Connection capabilities and pricing on their own site before you decide.

Where Maintenance Connection is strong

Maintenance Connection has been in the market for a long time and is used across asset-intensive industries, from manufacturing to healthcare. For an organisation with a dedicated maintenance and reliability function, the depth of the product, the scale it supports and its configurability are real advantages, and the backing of a large vendor in Accruent matters at the enterprise level. If your selection is being led by an enterprise reliability team that wants a mature, deep maintenance suite, Maintenance Connection is a credible, well-established choice, and you would not be wrong to pick it.

Where Cohiva Control is strong

Cohiva Control starts from a solid maintenance core and then keeps going into finance. Every asset you maintain is the same asset your accountant depreciates. The depreciation engine runs six methods, straight-line, diminishing value, double declining balance, units of production, sum of years digits and AASB 16 leases, and each monthly run writes to an append-only ledger and can post journals to Xero, QuickBooks, NetSuite or Cohiva Crunch. The monthly run is idempotent, so re-running it does not double-post.

Money is held as a fixed-precision decimal, rounded half up. Depreciation never takes book value below the residual value, a deliberate floor.

The contractor-compliance gate is the second differentiator. A contractor whose public liability insurance, trade licence or site induction is expired, missing or unverified cannot be assigned to a work order. The block is a hard 422 at the API with no override. Work orders move through a server-enforced state machine with an append-only history.

Cohiva Control is database per tenant, so each operator’s data sits in its own isolated database.

Choose Cohiva Control if

• You want maintenance and fixed-asset depreciation in one system, with journals posted to your accounting suite instead of re-keyed.
• You run regulated or insured contractors and want a hard, non-overridable compliance gate.
• You value an append-only audit and depreciation ledger and database-per-tenant isolation.
• You are an Australian operator and need AASB 16 lease treatment alongside the standard methods.

Choose Maintenance Connection if

• You run asset-intensive operations with a dedicated maintenance and reliability team that needs enterprise depth.
• Your finance team already depreciates assets elsewhere.
• You value the scale, maturity and configurability of an established enterprise suite.

Both can run a serious maintenance operation. The deciding question is whether your assets should leave the maintenance system to be depreciated, or stay in it. See Cohiva Control for manufacturing and the best CMMS software buyer guide.

Part of the Cohiva platform

Cohiva Control is one product in the Cohiva platform. Leisure and aquatic operators often pair it with Cohiva Complex for centre management, and finance teams connect it to Cohiva Crunch for the general ledger and consolidation. See the whole platform at www.cohiva.app.