Skip to content
Cloud Efficiency Hub

Transactable vs. Non-Transactable Confusion in Microsoft Marketplace

The short version

Microsoft Marketplace (formerly Azure Marketplace, unified with AppSource in September 2025) offers two types of listings: transactable and non-transactable.

Alexa Abbruscato

FinOps Specialist

Category
Other
Reference
CER-0133
Type
Underutilized Commitment

Explanation

Why the waste happens and who it affects.

Only transactable purchases can contribute toward a customer's MACC commitment, and even then only offers carrying the Azure benefit-eligible badge, purchased through Marketplace in the Azure portal with an Azure subscription tied to the organization's agreement, and used exclusively in Azure, count. However, many teams mistakenly assume that all Marketplace spend counts, leading to missed opportunities to burn down commitments and risking budget inefficiencies. Selecting a non-transactable listing, when a transactable equivalent exists, can result in identical services being acquired at higher effective cost due to lost discounts. This confusion is exacerbated when procurement and engineering teams do not coordinate or consult Microsoft's guidance.

Billing model

The pricing dimensions that drive this cost.

Commitment-based spend (MACC); purchases that are not transactable do not contribute to MACC consumption, and transactable purchases contribute only when the offer is Azure benefit-eligible and is bought through Marketplace in the Azure portal under the organization's agreement.

How to detect

6 checks to find it in your estate.

  • Review whether forecasted Marketplace spend was intended to count toward MACC but is not reflected in actual commitment consumption
  • Check each purchased offer for the Azure benefit-eligible badge, and confirm it was bought through Marketplace in the Azure portal rather than by credit card on the Microsoft Marketplace website
  • Check if listings procured through Microsoft Marketplace are labeled as "Contact Me" or redirect to external vendor websites, indicating non-transactable offers
  • Assess whether vendor agreements were finalized outside Azure, bypassing the Marketplace's billing mechanism
  • Compare purchases with Microsoft's Procurement Playbook to verify listing eligibility
  • Analyze purchasing behavior across departments to ensure consistency in sourcing methods

How to fix

4 ways to remove the waste.

  • Prefer transactable listings in Microsoft Marketplace whenever MACC utilization is a priority
  • Validate SKU eligibility against Microsoft's Procurement Playbook or MACC eligibility lists
  • Standardize sourcing templates and procurement workflows to explicitly document whether the offer contributes to MACC
  • Involve both finance and technical buyers early in vendor selection to avoid misalignment

Documentation

Vendor references for pricing and configuration.