Bank reconciliation software where agents explain every break, cite the proof and wait for your approval
Every break worked like a case, and fraud caught while the money can still come back.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Software that matches each bank statement to the ledger and explains every difference, so the bank balance ties to the book balance. Bank Reconciliation Automation adds seven agents: they match the routine lines, work every break as a case with cited hypotheses, draft the cash application or entry, check it to the cent and watch for duplicate and altered payments. A person approves every decision.
How to choose AI solutions for back-office and enterprise work →
Updated
Every morning each bank sends yesterday's statement — BAI2 from most North American banks, camt.053 or MT940 from banks elsewhere — and matching rules tie most lines to the ledger. The few hundred that do not match are where the work sits: a customer paid two invoices in one wire less a bank fee, a payroll journal transposed two digits, a sweep posted for one entity and not the other. They are worked in spreadsheets and email. The analyst pulls the remittance, searches receivables, asks a colleague and guesses, and the tools only say that a line failed to match, not why. Breaks age into reconciling items that the auditors sample at year end.
They are also where the risk sits. A supplier paid twice, a cheque altered after it was issued, a wire to a bank account changed three days earlier by an email from a look-alike domain. A duplicate ACH debit can be reversed only within five banking days of settlement, and a forged cheque must be reported inside the window the deposit agreement sets. Fraud found at month end is usually found after the money can still come back.
Estimated hours a day for one region's daily reconciliation of about 60 operating, receipts and disbursement accounts, by hand and with the solution.
Seven agents match the lines, work every break as a case with cited hypotheses and check each other to the cent; a person approves.
Kestrel & Vane Group runs 214 bank accounts at 11 banks across 13 legal entities. Friday 9 October's statements arrived over the weekend — 18,642 lines. Here is how Leo Grant, treasury analyst for the Americas, works them with the agents, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Leo's morning opens as a conversation, not a grid. The agents worked through the weekend: 18,417 of 18,642 lines matched by rule, 196 of 225 breaks cleared with cited evidence, 15 still being investigated and 14 that need him, 3 of them risk alerts. Each agent reports in its own words — the fraud sentinel on three payments that look wrong, the checker on two cases where it disagrees, the statement collector on the one bank that has not sent Friday's file.
Investigation agent: “The $18,250.00 deposit on ****4417 matches no invoice. It is two Fernwood invoices, $11,200.00 and $7,085.00, less a $35.00 intermediary charge. I am 97% sure and the checker agrees to the cent.”
Every line that did not match is a case in one of four lanes: Needs you 14, Agents investigating 15, Cleared 196, Reopened 0. Each shows the bank line, the agent's working hypothesis in a sentence, the evidence tested so far, a confidence and who it waits for — Claire for the Orvella Metals wire, Owen for the Brask Logistics debit, Nadia for the Hartwig exchange rate, Leo for seven of them. The matched lines sit in one small line at the top, because they are not the story.
“18,417 of 18,642 lines matched by rule overnight, so they are not cases.”
A $18,250.00 wire from FERNWOOD INC, reference “FW PMT OCT”, landed on ****4417, the operating receipts account of Kestrel & Vane Distribution at Ellisford National Bank. No open receivable is for that amount. H1, one invoice, is rejected: the nearest is Varek Tools at $18,520.00, a different customer. H3, a part payment of INV-K-40655, is rejected: it was settled on 2 Oct. H2 is confirmed at 97%: two Fernwood invoices in one wire, less a $35.00 intermediary charge.
Every test carries a numbered source; a click opens it.
“Replay the investigation” runs the agent's plan again on screen, one hypothesis at a time: it reads receivables, the remittance email, the bank statement's wire detail, Ellisford's fee schedule and the customer master, each step with what it found and how long it took. Leo sees what the agent read and in what order, not just a score.
“Plan: 3 hypotheses to test for +$18,250.00 on ****4417.”
Citation 3 opens Fernwood's remittance advice, received in the remittance inbox on Thu 8 Oct at 16:42: INV-K-40731 for $11,200.00 and INV-K-40768 for $7,085.00, together $18,285.00, by wire on 9 October. The wire detail shows $18,285.00 instructed and $35.00 deducted under shared charges (SHA), and Ellisford's fee schedule §4.2 passes intermediary charges through.
“Read-only copy kept with the case.”
Leo asks the question he would ask a colleague. The agent answers with its sources: Varek Tools pays by ACH from ****8830, this wire came from ****2291, Fernwood's account on file, and Varek has never short-paid. Below, the adjustment drafter has applied $11,200.00 and $7,050.00 and drafted JE-D-1009-018 — Dr 6420 Bank and wire charges $35.00, Cr 1210 Trade receivables, Fernwood Inc. $35.00. The checker re-performs it on its own.
Checker: “$11,200.00 + $7,085.00 − $35.00 = $18,250.00. The break clears to $0.00. Neither invoice is applied anywhere else. $35.00 is inside the $50.00 short-pay tolerance of policy TR-7.”
Leo approves with reason code FEE-WIRE — bank charge deducted from a wire, within tolerance — signed as Leo Grant, Treasury analyst, Americas. The case moves to Cleared, and the adjustment drafter parks JE-D-1009-018 in the ERP for posting; approved entries go to the ERP at 12:00 and 17:00. If something turns out wrong later, the case can be reopened with a note and the agents look again.
“Every decision needs a reason code and is chained in the audit trail.”
Brask Logistics was debited twice, $42,816.50 — the scheduled run and a manual re-send after a timeout — and the reversal window closes Fri 16 Oct, 4 banking days left. A $118,400.00 wire went to Orvella Metals at an account changed on 6 Oct from a look-alike domain, with no call-back recorded: recall today. Cheque #20418, issued for $974.00 to Lena Marsh, was paid at $9,740.00 to “L. Marsh Services” on an account not on positive pay: report to the bank by Sun 8 Nov.
The sentinel reads matched lines too: the Orvella wire matched, but to a changed account.
The sentinel has drafted the request to Ellisford's ACH operations: originate a reversing entry for the duplicate payment in file PR-1009-M, keep the original in file PR-1009-A, and notify Brask Logistics in advance, as the ACH rules require. Leo sends it to Owen Strand to approve. Every recall, reversal and claim needs two people, and no agent contacts a bank itself.
“Drafted by an agent. Edit freely; nothing is sent until you approve.”
With Fernwood cleared, ****4417 shows its reconciliation from bank to book: the bank balance, each item in the bank but not yet in the books linked to its case, a $12,880.00 lockbox deposit in transit, the GL 1010 balance — and an unexplained difference of $0.00. Signing records the reconciliation as control evidence; open cases stay listed until they clear. At month end, Claire Whitcombe signs.
The same Monday's breaks, seen by five of the people who carry them — what the morning looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven agents match the lines, work every break as a case with cited hypotheses and check each other to the cent; a person approves.
Collects prior-day and intraday statements from every bank — BAI2, camt.053, MT940 or PDF — checks control totals and that each opening balance equals the prior closing balance, and chases a late bank.
Ties statement lines to the ledger — one to one, one to many, many to one — inside the matching rules' tolerances, and sends every line it cannot tie on as a break.
Works each break as a case: forms hypotheses, tests them against remittances, receivables, payables, payment files, lockbox images, card settlements, the bank's wire detail and fee schedules, and records what it rejected and why, with a confidence.
Drafts the cash application, fee, interest, FX or correcting entry from the confirmed hypothesis.
Re-performs every proposal on its own from the raw lines: the break must clear to the cent, no item used twice, inside policy and limits.
Reads breaks and matched lines for duplicates, altered cheques, changed beneficiaries, look-alike domains and positive-pay gaps; runs the recall clocks and drafts reversals, recalls and claims.
Writes the daily status and digest, sends SLA reminders, and builds the month-end reconciliation pack and evidence packs.
Approves up to $25,000; the assistant treasurer co-signs above it and every recall. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask on Today, inside any case or of the fraud sentinel — or tell the agents what to try. Every answer cites its source, and nothing is sent until a person approves.
What is at risk today?
Three risk alerts. A $118,400.00 wire to Orvella Metals went to an account changed by a look-alike email: recall today. Brask Logistics was debited twice, $42,816.50, with the reversal due Fri 16 Oct. Cheque #20418 was altered from $974.00 to $9,740.00.
Why not the Varek invoice?
Varek Tools pays by ACH from ****8830 in the United States; this wire came from ****2291, Fernwood's account. Varek's INV-K-40702 is $18,520.00, $270.00 more than the wire, and Varek has never short-paid. That hypothesis stays rejected.
Which bank fees don't match our fee schedule?
Ellisford billed positive pay at $0.12 an item against $0.08 agreed: $96.40 over in September and $91.12 in August, $187.52 in all. The claim is drafted in C-5520-001.
Are other payments going to the new Orvella account?
None yet. One more Orvella payment, $36,210.00, is in Wednesday's run to the same new account. I propose holding it; that needs your approval.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
Limits, tolerances and matching rules are settings. A change needs the controller's signature and applies from the next statement.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst approval limit | $25,000.00 | Above it, a second approver (the assistant treasurer) |
| Recalls, reversals and claims | Always two people | The drafter never sends |
| Fee rule FR-2 (version 4) | Up to $250.00 | Fee entries that match the bank's schedule; a weekly sample of 5 to the controller |
| Short-pay tolerance (policy TR-7) | $50.00 | Bank charges only; above it the customer is asked |
| Agents ask a person below | 75% confidence | Matching suggestions below 95% are never applied |
| Break must be worked within | 1 business day | The clock starts when the statement arrives; a warning 4 hours before it is due |
| Matching rule R3, amount and date | ±2 banking days | ±1 · ±2 · ±3 · ±5 banking days, simulated on last week before it is saved |
| Matching rules | Version 9, approved by the controller | Reference exact · reference fuzzy · amount and date · one to many, up to 12 items · lockbox batch · card settlement net of fees · sweep pairs |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (AFP 2026 Payments Fraud and Control Survey, via Nacha news, May 2026, and Digital Transactions, Aug 2026 — 74% of organisations faced business email compromise in 2025; cheques remain the payment type most often defrauded, at 58%). Clocks: Nacha Operating Rules, Article Two §2.9 — reversing entries within five banking days of settlement; UCC 4-406 — the customer's duty to examine statements, which deposit agreements may shorten. People, companies, banks and accounts named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Software that matches each bank statement to the ledger and explains every difference, so the bank balance ties to the book balance. Bank Reconciliation Automation adds seven agents: they match the routine lines, work every break as a case with cited hypotheses, draft the cash application or entry, check it to the cent and watch for duplicate and altered payments. A person approves every decision.
The investigation agent forms competing hypotheses — one invoice, several invoices less a bank fee, a part payment — and tests each against remittances, receivables, payment files, the bank's wire detail and the fee schedule. It records which it rejected and why, with a confidence and a citation for every test, and you can replay the investigation step by step.
No. The agents draft the cash application or entry and the checker re-performs it, but nothing posts, applies cash, holds a payment or reaches a bank until a person approves with a reason code. Approved entries are parked in the ERP for posting.
The fraud sentinel reads breaks and matched lines for duplicates, altered cheques, changed beneficiaries and look-alike domains, and counts down the clock that applies — five banking days to reverse a duplicate ACH entry, or the reporting window in the bank's deposit agreement. It drafts the reversal, recall or claim; a second person approves it.
BAI2, ISO 20022 camt.053, MT940 and PDF statements, prior-day and intraday, received host to host, by bank API, over EBICS or SWIFT. Before matching, the statement collector checks control totals and that each opening balance equals the prior closing balance, and chases a bank whose file is late.
Yes. The treasury analyst approves, edits or rejects every proposal with a reason code and can reopen a cleared case with a note. Above $25,000 and for every recall a second person approves, the preparer is never the approver, and when two agents disagree the case comes to a person with both views.
Yes. Matching rules, date windows, the short-pay tolerance, the fee rule, approval limits and SLAs are settings. A rule change is simulated on last week's lines, signed by the controller and saved as a new version on the audit trail.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your bank formats, chart of accounts, policies and a sample of past statements — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own statements first.
Every balance tied to its support, and every difference explained before anyone signs.
1-min demoFlux AnalysisEvery variance explained to within 5%, with cited drivers, before the board sees it.
1-min demoAccrual AutomationEvery accrual proposed with its proof by day one, checked so no cost is counted twice.
1-min demoWe'll run Bank Reconciliation Automation on a week of your own prior-day statements and ledger.