Developed over a hundred years ago, budgeting continuously played an essential part in the practise of economics. In technical literature, this particular form of budgeting, which has preveailed for over a century, is commonly referred to as classical or traditional budgeting. Within the recent couple of decades, however, a multidtude of critical voices have arisen, claiming that budgeting in its traditional form is not fit anymore to face the challenges of modern enterprises. Some of the most promiment and recurring arguments against classical budgeting adress its unflexibility, ineficciency regarding time and costs, further its complexity and lack of strategic focus. To remove these weak spots, a number of new promising models have been developed over the last ten years. The names Beyond Budgeting, Better Budgeting, Advanced Budgeting and modern Budgeting may vary as much as their approaches, but on the whole, all of the mentioned models aim for the same target, which is to solve the problems of traditional budgeting. While some of the models offer suggestions for improval of traditional budgeting, others have chosen a completely radical approach, demanding the abolishment of traditional budgeting altogether. Be that as it may, there is again one interesting aspect they all have in common. It appears that each of the developers of the above models is firmly convinced that their approach represents the ultimate sollution for a modern enterprise. So who is right? The main aim of this thesis encompasses a critical analysis of the above mentioned models by comparing them between eachother as well as with their traditional counterpart and, to highlight their advantages and disadvantages. The information gathered through the analysis should provide enough indicators as to answer the following questions: Has traditional budgeting really had its day and is there a perfect replacement for it? If so, how does it look like?