Insolnet vs a generic open-banking summary tool
How a pre-appointment Bank Analysis on Insolnet differs from running an Armalytix-style transaction summary in isolation — written for accountants weighing both.
The short version
Generic open-banking summary tools (Armalytix, Plaid-based tools, Fintech reconcilers, etc.) categorise transactions and produce well-structured cash-flow views. They are excellent at what they do. They do not, in themselves, identify the specific antecedent-transaction patterns that create personal exposure for directors and recoveries for liquidators.
Insolnet runs an additional layer on top: a deterministic categoriser seeded with Companies House appointments and known counterparties, then an IP-specific findings review by Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7, with every output personally reviewed by Joe Whiley MIPA. The intent is to surface the things a liquidator's case manager would surface post-appointment — only earlier, while there is still time to advise.
Side by side
| Feature | Generic open-banking tool | Insolnet |
|---|---|---|
| Open-banking ingest | Yes | Yes (via Armalytix integration, in development) plus CSV upload as fallback |
| Transaction categorisation | Generic categories (subsistence, payroll, etc.) | IP-specific categories (director drawings, connected-party payments, HMRC, …) seeded with the director's Companies House appointments |
| Counterparty resolution | Account name / payment reference | Cross-referenced against Companies House records so connected entities are flagged automatically |
| Antecedent-transaction findings | Not produced | Section 239 preferences, section 238 transactions at undervalue, overdrawn DLA quantification, likely unlawful dividends, misfeasance patterns, phoenix-prep indicators |
| Statutory hooks on each finding | Not provided | Each finding cross-referenced to the relevant Insolvency Act / Companies Act / CDDA section, deep-linked to the framework page |
| IP review of output | No (tool output, no professional review) | Every output personally reviewed by Joe Whiley MIPA (IPA 105090) before the working call with the accountant |
| Working conversation included | Tool output only | Working call with Joe to walk through findings, discuss options, agree the recommendation back to the director |
| Pre-appointment positioning | Generic financial-analysis tool | Designed specifically for the moment before a CVL or MVL decision — while remediation is still possible |
| Case management on engagement | No | If the case proceeds to liquidation, the same platform handles KYC, statutory documents, Creditors Hub, Companies House sync, dividend distribution |
| Cost to the accountant firm | Subscription or per-report | Free. Insolnet is funded by CVL/MVL fees on engaged cases only. |
When a generic tool is the right answer
Generic open-banking summary tools are the right choice for routine cash-flow analysis, KYC source-of-funds checks, mortgage-application income evidencing, and the broader bookkeeping work an accountant does day-to-day. They are general-purpose; they are competent; they have their place.
Use them when the question is “what does this bank account look like in summary?”
When Insolnet is the right answer
Insolnet is the right tool when the question is specifically “what will a liquidator see in this bank account?” That is a meaningfully different question. It requires the categoriser to know what an overdrawn DLA looks like in the data, what a connected-party preference looks like, what an unlawful dividend looks like — and an IP to confirm the findings before they are discussed with the introducing accountant.
Use Insolnet when an owner-managed client is in cash-flow difficulty, or you suspect the conversation will become about CVL or MVL within the next 6–12 months. The right time is before a decision to liquidate, not after.
Can you use both?
Yes. Many of our partner firms continue to use Armalytix or a similar tool for general client work and use Insolnet specifically for cases where insolvency is on the table. The two are not mutually exclusive; they answer different questions.
Try Insolnet on a real case
Free to your firm. A 20-minute walk-through, then run the analysis on a watch-list client. No commitment.