With Shopify Stocky reaching end-of-life, many merchants are evaluating what comes next.
What we’ve learned from talking with retailers is that the challenge isn’t simply replacing Stocky.
The challenge is everything that happens after the purchase order:
• Receiving inventory
• Managing short shipments
• Put-away workflows
• Bin locations
• Cycle counts
• Picking and packing
• Inventory visibility
• Connecting operations back to finance
We’re building NexuSphere AI around those operational workflows.
Over the next few months we’re looking for 3-5 retailers willing to share feedback as we continue developing:
✓ Purchasing
✓ Receiving
✓ Put-away
✓ Bin management
✓ Cycle counting
✓ Pick / Pack / Ship
✓ Inventory movement tracking
No sales pitch.
We’re looking to learn from operators dealing with these challenges every day.
If you’re actively evaluating post-Stocky options and would like to see what we’re building, we’re happy to provide extended trial access and work directly with your team as we continue refining the product.
Good framing — the post-PO operational gap is the real pain, not just the PO tool itself. For retailers reading this and evaluating options now: the most urgent step before Aug 31 is exporting your Stocky data (purchase orders, suppliers, cost history, stocktakes), because that history doesn’t migrate into Shopify automatically. On the workflow side, the realistic shortlist today tends to be Shopify’s native POs/transfers for basic needs, or dedicated IMS/WMS tools (e.g. Katana, inFlow, Cin7, Fishbowl) once you need receiving, bin locations, cycle counts, and pick/pack. Key evaluation criteria: does it write back to Shopify inventory in real time, handle multi-location, and preserve landed cost per unit? That last one is where most Stocky replacements fall short. Worth testing with your actual SKU count and PO volume before committing.
Good points.
We agree that preserving historical inventory and purchasing data before the Stocky shutdown is important for merchants evaluating their options.
We’ve also noticed that many inventory tools focus heavily on purchasing and replenishment, while operational workflows such as receiving, put-away, cycle counts, and inventory movement tracking often become the bigger challenge as businesses scale.
That’s one of the reasons we’re focusing on the operational side of inventory management alongside purchasing.
Appreciate you sharing the evaluation criteria.
Thanks Steve.
That’s exactly what we’ve been hearing from merchants.
Most conversations start with replacing purchase orders, but quickly move into receiving, put-away, inventory visibility, cycle counts, and warehouse workflows.
We’re intentionally building around those operational processes because that’s where inventory accuracy is won or lost.
As we continue working with pilot retailers, we’re hoping to learn which workflows create the biggest operational bottlenecks and where automation can have the most impact.
Appreciate the feedback.
Hi there @kthoppae
Stocky’s pivot is certainly underscoring just how critical the supply side of inventory management is for retailers. The bigest gap I’m running into is that buying is just a portion of the workflow. Receiving, discrepancies, put away, bin locations and cycle counts all must remain linked.
For merchants considering their next setup, I’d suggest first mapping out the entire inventory workflow to see which Stocky functions are must haves and which can be let go. Shopify’s built-in purchase orders, inventory transfers, and stock adjustments handle some of this, and custom workflows can address specific gaps without modifying the entire process.
Hey @kthoppae
hope you’re doing well!
Me too! The post-Stocky gap goes far beyond purchase orders. Receiving, bin management, cycle counts, and inventory visibility are all critical parts of the workflow that need a solid replacement.