/ Demo · Finance ops Simulated run · representative data

By the time the books close,
the audit trail is already written.

This page replays the close-cycle pattern from our finance ops track. An agent ties out accounts, explains variances with citations into the ERP, and drafts journal entries that wait for the controller's name. The balances and deltas below are representative; the pipeline shape is what we ship.

A simulated close-cycle run reconciles six general ledger accounts for period June 2026. Cash and bank ties out via bank feed match: 412 lines matched, with one reconciling item, June bank service fees of $186, drafted as journal entry JE-1041. Accounts receivable ties via subledger tie-out. Accounts payable runs a 3-way match, finds one purchase order received but not invoiced at $42,780, and drafts an accrual entry citing the PO, the receipt, and the vendor invoice. The accruals pass flags travel expense up 38 percent month over month, explains the flux by citing three specific ERP transactions tied to a Q2 offsite and card feed lag, and drafts an $18,420 accrual. Prepaids amortize per the policy schedule. Intercompany finds a $3,114 mismatch against the UK subsidiary, traces it to invoice INV-UK-588 posted on July 1 in the UK ledger, and routes it to the controller as an exception with both ledger extracts attached; the controller decides whether to carry it as a reconciling item or post a true-up. Five journal entries land in the controller queue with their support documents; the controller approves two during the run, which post under the approver's name, while the rest wait. The run ends with six accounts tied out, nine variances explained with citations, five journal entries drafted for approval, and one exception routed.

/ Controller queue

Five entries drafted. None posts without approval.

Drafts land here with their support attached: the ERP transactions, bank feed lines, and schedules behind each number. The controller approves, edits, or rejects each entry before anything posts.

Entry Account Memo Amount Support cited Status

Materiality thresholds and approval rules here are illustrative. In an engagement they are set with your controller and encoded as policy your auditor can read.

0/6
Accounts tied out this run
0
Variances explained with citations
0
JEs drafted for controller approval
0
Exceptions routed with evidence
/ The pattern

Retrieval is grounded. Gates are explicit. Approval is human.

ERP-grounded retrieval

Every number on the close traces to a source: NetSuite transactions, bank feed lines, amortization schedules. Variance explanations cite the specific entries behind the change, so review starts from evidence.

NetSuite + bank feedsCited transactionsFlux with sources

Explicit policy gates

The close checklist and materiality thresholds live as OPA rules your auditor can read. Every gate decision writes a SOX-ready packet: inputs, rule results, and the threshold that fired.

OPA policy rulesMateriality thresholdsSOX-ready packets

Controller-in-the-loop

Drafted entries post only with a person's approval, and each decision seals a full audit packet. The reference scope targets 12 wk to production with 3-way match running exception-only.

Approval gatesAudit packet per decision12 wk to production

Run this on your close.

Tell us your ERP, your close calendar, and the day-count that would prove this works. We respond in two business days with a scoped proposal.