Watch it run
Seven seconds from inbox to a balanced journal entry, with the policy check and the approval gate shown in full.
Watch the agentThe difference
A parallel ledger that reconciles to your existing system every morning — to the penny, per account, per period.
See the tie-outCase study
Consolidated reporting in eleven days, without leaving the accounting system they already ran.
Read the storyMost requested
Most ERP projects miss their business case. We take over stalled deployments and get them closing books again.
Get a free assessmentEditorial policy
No paid placement, published criteria, disclosed ownership on every page. The directory is worth more than any deal it could win.
Read the methodologyNew research
We surveyed finance leaders on what actually went wrong. The answers are not what vendors tell you.
Read the studyPartner program
Accounting firms, fractional CFOs, and ERP consultants deliver implementations on our platform.
Become a partnerFree tools
Every one of these renders its result in full without an email, and every one publishes how it scores. A tool that gates its own answer is a lead form wearing a costume, and readers can tell.
Three questions and a person reads it. You get a written assessment rather than a score.
The tools
Every one publishes the assumptions behind it on the same page. None of them gate the result behind an email address, and nothing you enter leaves your browser.
Nine questions, a strain index, and an honest answer — including when the answer is no.
Four questions and a ranked shortlist of ten products, with reasons. Competitors included.
Three-year cost across six systems as user and entity count change. Assumptions published.
What your current stack actually costs once licences, tools, and manual hours are counted.
Realistic weeks to cut over, by source system, entity count, and history depth.
Where a live or planned project is most likely to fail, scored against known patterns.
Which finance workflows in your business are ready to hand to an agent, and which are not.
A defensible starting chart by industry and entity structure, with dimensions separated.
The standard playbook is to run the calculation, show a teaser, and ask for an email before revealing the number. It converts, in the narrow sense that it produces contact records. It also trains every visitor to treat the tool as an advertisement, which means the people who most needed the answer stop trusting it.
We would rather the tool be genuinely useful and lose the addresses of people who were never going to buy. The ones who are evaluating seriously tend to come back, and they arrive already believing the numbers — which is worth considerably more than an email address collected under mild duress.
The QuickBooks quiz states its nine dimensions and their weighting. The selection tool publishes every scoring adjustment, including the one that penalises outgrowing a system more heavily than over-buying. The TCO calculator lists its implementation multiples per vendor and says plainly which line it excludes and why.
This is the same commitment as the directory methodology: a number you cannot audit is a claim, not a finding. It also has a practical benefit — when someone disagrees with an output, the conversation is about an assumption rather than about whether we are being honest.
All three tools run entirely in your browser. No result is sent anywhere unless you explicitly ask us to email it to you.
Questions
Send us a result you disagree with and we will tell you whether the model is wrong or the assumption is.