AP use case · Order-to-cash

The penalty is automatic.
The appeal shouldn't be manual.

Quick commerce and modern trade grade you PO by PO - short-supply, late delivery, OTIF breaches - and deduct penalties by formula. Finnoto tracks your true fill performance, recalculates every penalty, and contests the ones their math got wrong.

Fill-rate console

Measured, verified, contested -
PO line by PO line.

OTIF · Blinkit · Nov Live
94.2%
Fill rate (our count, POD-verified)
91.8%
Fill rate (their portal)
₹86,400
Penalties this month · ₹31,200 contested
POTheir calcOur calcStatus
PO-8812388% · penalty96% · POD-backed! Contested · GRN vs POD gap
PO-8814072% · penalty71% · stock-outValid · root cause logged
PO-88161Late · penaltySlot honoured 09:41! Contested · gate-in timestamp
Root-cause board
Nov short-supply: 61% one SKU's stock-outs, 22% appointment slips, 17% GRN disputes - each with an owner, not a debate.
Penalty guard
Penalty charged on cancelled PO lines (their cancellation) - formula error, contested with portal evidence.
fill-rate from source events, not portal summaries · every penalty recalculated · appeals filed inside window

Illustrative product behaviour - values shown are examples.

Why it's hard today

You're graded by their data.
Do you keep your own?

Penalty formulas are contractual, but the inputs come from the buyer's systems - GRN timing, slot logs, cancelled lines. Without your own record, every penalty is unappealable.

Their math, unaudited

Fill-rate penalties computed on their GRN counts and their timestamps. Formula errors and disputed GRNs ride straight into deductions.

OTIF windows are tight

On-time-in-full grading turns a 40-minute dock delay into a penalty. Contesting needs your gate-in evidence, filed fast.

Causes never loop back

Finance sees penalties; ops sees stock-outs; nobody connects them. The same SKU keeps failing, the same penalty keeps landing.

The Finnoto difference: your fill-rate is computed from your own dispatch, gate-in and POD events - so appeals carry evidence and ops gets root causes, not blame.
How Finnoto runs it

Own the number
you're judged by.

1
Measure from source
Fill and OTIF computed per PO line from your dispatch, gate-in and POD data - independent of buyer portals.
2
Recalculate every penalty
Each penalty re-derived from the contract formula; mismatches classified as formula, data or genuine.
3
Contest with evidence
Wrong penalties appealed inside the window with timestamps, PODs and GRN records attached.
4
Fix the real causes
Genuine failures traced to stock-outs, slotting or SKU issues - routed to owners with trend lines.
FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Which platforms grade fill-rate this way?

Blinkit, Zepto and Instamart in quick commerce; most modern-trade chains and B2B marketplaces run OTIF or fill-rate service-level regimes with automatic penalties.

How many penalties are typically wrong?

It varies - but formula errors, penalties on buyer-cancelled lines, and GRN-timing disputes are common enough that recalculation pays for itself. You'll know your own rate within a cycle.

Does this help improve actual fill rate too?

Yes - the root-cause board separates stock-outs, appointment slips and receiving disputes, so supply planning fixes what's real instead of arguing about what isn't.

Contest the wrong. Fix the real.

PO-level fill truth across every channel that grades you.

Talk to us