Understanding Conto's Readiness Score
When you import your General Ledger, Conto calculates a readiness score that predicts how well it can auto-match bank statement transactions to your GL data. The score reflects data quality for matching purposes—not your accounting practices.
Score Levels
Section titled “Score Levels”| Level | Badge | Auto-Match | What to Expect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ready | Green | 60%+ | Most transactions match automatically |
| Caution | Yellow | 30-60% | Moderate matching, some review needed |
| Limited | Orange | 10-30% | Expect significant manual review |
| Poor | Red | <10% | Consider fixing source data first |
| New | Gray | Unknown | First import, learning your patterns |
How It’s Calculated
Section titled “How It’s Calculated”Three weighted factors determine the score:
| Factor | Weight | What Conto Checks |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor Match Rate | 40% | Do payee names in your GL match known vendor names? |
| Check Number Coverage | 30% | What % of checks have valid check numbers? |
| Generic Payee Penalty | 30% | How many checks have vague/generic payee names? |
All three factors must be good. One bad factor drags down the entire score. If check numbers are perfect but payee names are all “MISC”, Conto can’t confidently match transactions.
Vendor match rate
Section titled “Vendor match rate”Conto matches bank statement payees against your vendor list. “ABC Supplies” on a statement matching “ABC Supplies” in your vendors creates a high-confidence match. When names don’t match—or payees aren’t in the vendor list—Conto falls back to weaker signals like check numbers, amounts, and dates.
Check numbers
Section titled “Check numbers”Check numbers are unique identifiers. Even when the payee name is ambiguous, check number + amount + date can produce a confident match. Without check numbers, Conto relies on payee name and amount alone, which is less precise and more prone to false matches.
Generic payees
Section titled “Generic payees”Names like TIP, PAYROLL, CASH, MISC, and OWNER are too vague to match reliably. When Conto sees “TIP” on both a check and a bank statement, it can’t determine if they’re the same transaction or two different tip payments.
Real-World Example
Section titled “Real-World Example”A restaurant client imported a GL where 97% of checks had “TIP” as the payee. Check numbers were present but couldn’t overcome the generic name problem.
Result: 2% auto-match rate, 77% manual review.
After itemizing tip payments by employee name and re-importing, their score improved to Caution with significantly better auto-matching.
The Trade-off
Section titled “The Trade-off”Some firms use generic names intentionally—it’s faster during data entry. This is a valid workflow choice with a matching trade-off:
- Generic names = faster data entry, more manual review in Conto
- Specific names = slower data entry, better auto-matching
The readiness score helps you understand the implications and decide whether cleanup is worth the effort.
What the Score Doesn’t Affect
Section titled “What the Score Doesn’t Affect”The score is purely predictive. It has no impact on pricing, functionality, or data integrity. All Conto features work regardless of score.
Conto needs at least 100 transactions for an accurate prediction.