A client hands over eight statements for three accounts and asks a question that sounds simple: what is the real picture. The arithmetic is easy. The work is making eight differently-formatted files comparable, and then being able to show how you got each number.
Where it helps most
Cash scrutiny
Cash deposits and withdrawals separated from transfers, with dates, branches and cities, grouped so a pattern is visible instead of scattered across eight hundred rows. More
Related-party movement
Transfers between the client's own accounts identified as internal, so turnover and counterparty figures are not double-counted.
Counterparty concentration
Who the money actually came from and went to, ranked and consolidated, with six spellings of one supplier treated as one supplier.
Reconciling to the books
A verified transaction table per account, with the file's own completeness stated, so a difference is a real difference and not a missing page.
Large and unusual items
High-value movement, round figures and recurring amounts, each opening the rows behind it for the working paper.
Exportable working papers
Sections as CSV and a printable report, generated from the same analysis reviewed on screen.
The check to run before anything else
Every imported statement is tested against the running balance printed in it. When that chain does not close, the file is almost always partial — a page short, or a date-filtered export. Discovering that at the start costs a minute; discovering it after reconciling to the ledger costs a week and some credibility.
What to be careful about
- A pattern is not a conclusion. Cash-intensive businesses deposit cash; related parties do transact. The views point at rows to examine.
- Extraction is verified but not infallible. Figures that carry weight should be checked against the source statement — which is a click away from every total.
- Client data handling is the firm's responsibility. See security and data handling for where processing and storage actually happen.