Balance sheet account reconciliation and certification
Reads trial balance, sub-ledgers, supporting schedules. Produces certified reconciliations, open items aged. Code works out every figure, the Judgement Engine answers the narrow questions, and whatever stays uncertain goes to a person.
Narrow questions, each with a check behind it.
What explains each balance; whether support is enough
Proven by code: sub-ledger and support tie to GL. Code proves the answer from the data itself: totals tie, a match is exact, the quote is on the document. Most of these judgements settle without a person.
| Reads | Trial balance, sub-ledgers, supporting schedules |
| Produces | Certified reconciliations, open items aged |
| Who signs | A person on your team, with every figure traced to its document and every call on record |
| Process | Close and accounting |
| Industry | Finance and accounting |
Every line, decided where it's safest.
An example run. Each stage lights up as a line is decided there; pick a stage to see its lines.
| Ref | Item | Value | Decided by |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1020 | Bank CHFStatement balance ties to the ledger | 184,220.15 | Code · tied |
| 1100 | Trade receivablesAgeing report ties to the ledger | 412,880.00 | Code · tied |
| 1300 | Prepaid expensesSchedule supports the balance · 0.94 | 36,400.00 | Engine · proven |
| 2100 | Accrued liabilitiesOne accrual has no support attached | 58,900.00 | To a person |
| 2200 | VAT payableTies to the filed return less payments | 21,640.00 | Code · tied |
|
Settled 4
To a person 1
Settled wrong 0
| |||
Your volumes in. Your hours out.
In our tests, between 24% and 42% of items still went to a person after tuning. Set your own share; a pilot measures it on your data.
Start from what's closest.
Close and accounting in other work
Manual journal entry review
Whether an entry is supported, authorised, unusual
FinanceAccruals review
Whether an accrual is needed and its size is supported
FinancePrepayments and amortisation
Which invoices are prepaid; the period they cover
More for finance
What buyers ask
What happens when Sumarity isn't sure?
Nothing settles below the cutoff, or when the check disagrees. The item goes to a person in the inbox with what the engine saw, its best answer and the runner-up. The person's ruling is kept and tunes the next run.
How are its judgements checked?
Code proves the answer from the data itself: totals tie, a match is exact, the quote is on the document. Most of these judgements settle without a person.
Can we change it to fit how we work?
Yes. Start from this workflow and describe your differences in plain words. The design assistant revises it, the validator checks it, your expert reviews it on the canvas, and your admin publishes it.
Does it read our files as they are?
Yes: spreadsheets and CSV in any layout, PDFs, bank formats and e-mail attachments. Sumarity suggests how each column maps, proves the mapping on a sample and remembers it once a person confirms it.
Where does our data go?
Sumarity runs in Zurich. Your data, backups and logs are stored in Switzerland.
How does it get better?
Your team's rulings become an answer key. Better questions and cutoffs are proposed, tested on data they haven't seen, and published only when your admin approves. It improves itself, with permission.
Start from this workflow. Run it on your data.
A pilot runs alongside your own process for a few weeks, at our cost, and ends in a line-by-line comparison.