Matching and tolerances: resolving bank differences without concealing them

Automatic matching reduces the effort of comparing many bank and ERP lines. A tolerance can allow a defined difference under a supported matching rule. Both features are useful only when their meaning is understood.

A suggested match is a candidate relationship between records. It is not proof that the two records describe the same business event.

Matching signals

Amount, date, reference, and transaction description can all help identify a relationship. Their reliability varies. A unique reference can be stronger evidence than an amount repeated many times in the same period.

DNA's bank reconciliation supports matching methods, manual review, and tolerances. These tools should be used to organise the evidence, while the underlying event determines whether the match makes sense.

A practical ambiguity

Three customer receipts of USD 1,000 appear in the ERP. The bank statement has one USD 1,000 line with a reference corresponding to only one customer. Matching it to the first equal amount can leave the wrong receipt reconciled.

The overall unmatched total might still look plausible. The error becomes visible when the actual reference and customer relationship are examined. This is why matching quality cannot be judged only by the number of lines cleared.

What a tolerance means

A tolerance defines an acceptable numerical difference for a particular rule or review process. It does not automatically explain the difference. A fee, rounding amount, exchange effect, or recording error can each produce a small discrepancy with a different meaning.

The permitted treatment must follow the company's policy and the supported reconciliation process. Increasing tolerance simply to remove unmatched items can hide problems rather than resolve them.

Timing differences

A transaction may be correctly recorded but appear on the bank statement in another period. The evidence should explain that timing rather than force a match to an unrelated line in the current statement.

The same principle applies to grouped movements. One bank deposit may relate to several supported underlying receipts or a gateway payout. The grouping needs a real business basis, not only a convenient arithmetic sum.

A useful exception review

An unresolved line should have a classified reason and a responsible next decision. The cause may be missing ERP activity, missing external evidence, a duplicate, a timing difference, or a disputed amount.

Good matching leaves each significant relationship explainable. It reduces manual effort while preserving the evidence needed to trust the reconciliation.