Skip to content
All guides

Reconciliation

How automatic bank transaction matching works

Reliable matching is not a search for one vaguely similar record. It is a ranked comparison against eligible open invoices, supplier expenses and reimbursements, followed by a deliberate confidence boundary.

8 minute readPractical Aeglio guide

The short answer

Aeglio ranks eligible records using exact or partial amount, payment reference, counterparty details, date proximity and whether the best candidate is clearly ahead. Automatic matching requires an exact amount, a strong score and no close runner-up. Everything else stays available for review.

Start by limiting the eligible records

An incoming credit should be compared with open sales invoices. An outgoing debit should be compared with payable supplier expenses and reimbursement reports. Already settled, unrelated or inaccessible records should not compete for the match.

This eligibility step matters as much as scoring. A perfect amount is weak evidence when dozens of unrelated closed records remain in the search pool.

Combine evidence with different strengths

Aeglio gives the exact amount the largest general weight. An exact payment reference is also strong. A similar name and nearby date add supporting evidence. For outgoing payments, a matching recipient IBAN can contribute too.

Incoming transactions do not receive a counterparty mismatch reason merely because the client record lacks an IBAN. That absent field should not count against an otherwise strong customer payment.

  • Exact amount: required for a normal automatic match.
  • Exact reference: strong direct evidence when present.
  • Name, date and outgoing recipient IBAN: useful supporting evidence.
  • Unique lead: protects against two similarly plausible records.

Understand why 70% can still be the wrong presentation

A candidate with exact amount, similar name, close date and no competing record is much stronger than its raw evidence sum may first suggest. A uniqueness bonus reflects that practical difference. In Aeglio, that combination reaches 90%, while an exact reimbursement reference can produce a deterministic 100% candidate.

The interface should explain the evidence in words. A percentage without reasons makes a good suggestion feel arbitrary.

Keep exceptions fast and reversible

A reviewer can select another searchable invoice, expense or reimbursement, split a transaction across records, mark irrelevant activity in bulk or undo a recent decision. The side panel keeps actions and evidence together, and keyboard navigation moves through the queue.

When a match is recorded, Aeglio creates the corresponding payment or reimbursement allocation and stores an immutable event with the actor, source, amount and reasons.

Aeglio shows the strongest candidate and its evidence while keeping ambiguous transactions in review. The company and figures shown are fictional.

Frequently asked questions

Will an exact amount always match automatically?
No. The amount must be exact, the total score must meet the threshold and the best candidate must lead the runner-up by a safe margin.
Can one bank transaction pay several records?
Yes. Manual split allocation can connect a transaction to multiple supported records without allocating more than the available amount.
Can an automatic match be reviewed later?
Yes. The reconciliation stores the confidence, reasons, target and immutable event history.