Me
HershAfter selecting DualEntry over newer platforms like Campfire, Rillet, and Light based on claims of superior functionality and stability, I created this site to document the issues I have experienced over the past six months, in the hope that the leadership team will take these seriously and respond to me, and that others can factor this into their decisions until they are resolved.
Primary Points of Contact
Responsible for delivering the functional promises detailed below.
Santiago
Co-Founder
Benedict
Co-Founder
David
Head of Sales
Migration Timeline and Implementation Expertise
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
We can migrate companies from legacy systems in 24-48 hours (explicit commitment made during sales process) | Migration took several months. Each import file (vendors, inter-co, direct expenses) took days to process. System is still not fully live with basic accounting functionality. |
We have migrated customers from your system before and can manage the process | They had not. Customer had to perform all implementation configuration personally and constantly identify and correct basic setup errors. |
Intercompany and Due To / Due From Handling
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
Selecting an intercompany customer or vendor automatically triggers correct intercompany handling | Intercompany customer or vendor selection frequently fails or is unavailable on IC payable lines |
System automatically creates full AP and AR structure for intercompany | Many IJEs fail to create eliminations or full intercompany structure |
Users do not need to manually construct multi-entry intercompany transactions | Users must manually investigate and correct missing eliminations and broken IC entries |
Eliminations are automatically created and applied | Eliminations frequently fail to load, fail to create, or revert after edits |
Eliminations never affect parent expense accounts | Eliminations appear inconsistently and distort entity-level reporting |
Eliminations only affect consolidated reporting | Eliminations persist incorrectly in entity-level views and reports |
Eliminations never appear in single-entity views | Eliminations appear or disappear inconsistently between JE view and reports |
Intercompany functionality is production-proven and used by public companies | Intercompany functionality is one of the most unstable and failure-prone areas of the system |
Archiving as a Safe Replacement for Deletion
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
Anything can be archived | Many IC journals cannot be archived from the journal view |
Archiving is equivalent to deletion for workflow | Archiving leaves elimination lines active in the general ledger |
Archived items do not appear in ledgers | Archived items continue to impact financials through orphaned elimination lines |
Archiving keeps the ledger clean | Archiving creates orphaned records with blank or missing record numbers |
Archiving removes clutter without reversals | Archiving partially applies and leaves corrupted records behind |
Archiving works across all transaction types | IC journals cannot be reliably archived or restored |
Archiving is safe and audit compliant | Archiving breaks data integrity and leaves unreconciled ledger state |
Posting Model and Real Time Financials
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
Users can post immediately with permission | Posting fails in several IC workflows |
Posted transactions immediately update reports | Reports show incorrect or missing vendor and customer values |
Unposted transactions do not affect reports | Archived and matched transactions reappear as unmatched or active |
Posting ensures controllable GAAP workflow | Posting combined with broken archive and eliminations corrupts ledger state |
Ledger remains clean through posting and archiving | Ledger accumulates orphaned eliminations, missing records, and phantom entries |
AI and Rules Engine
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
AI automatically prepares transactions from bank feeds | AI created transactions revert user edits on creation |
AI reduces manual effort | AI suggestions must be manually re-corrected repeatedly |
AI does not auto post | AI creation interferes with user-controlled creation |
Rules automate classification reliably | Rules fail to persist matches and return items to To Match |
Rules engine production-ready in July | Rules creation errors and rule application failures occur in production |
Bulk automation reduces manual work | Bulk operations stall, fail, or create incorrect data |
Bulk Edit and Bulk Upload
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
Bulk edits available for any list | Bulk editing is still not available in the system |
Bulk edits reduce correction effort | Bulk uploads create incorrect dates and missing vendors |
Bulk tools handle high volume | Large bulk uploads fail while small files succeed |
Bulk operations are production-ready | Bulk operations create entries that later cannot be found |
Bank Match and Bank Feeds
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
AI prepares transactions accurately | User edits are ignored and reverted to AI suggestions |
Matching retains user selections | Selected customers and accounts are dropped on creation |
Bank feeds are reliable | Confirmed bank transactions never appear in the system |
Matched items stay matched | Matched and archived items reappear as unmatched |
Multi-match mode works at scale | Multi-match mode breaks and loses system-side transactions |
Bank match shows complete data | Bank match fails to load, loses amounts, and shows duplicates |
Reporting and Dashboards
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
Reports accurately reflect posted data | Reports show incorrect vendor and customer values |
Reports are reliable for management decisions | Reports contain missing, random, and inconsistent data |
Entity-level reports are clean | Entity reports include intercompany artifacts and eliminations |
Consolidated reports are accurate | Consolidated reports are unreliable due to broken eliminations |
Dashboard provides real time visibility | Real time data is distorted by posting, archiving, and matching failures |
Auditability and Data Integrity
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
Archiving preserves full auditability | Audit trails are missing or empty after incidents |
System maintains complete history | Entire entity data sets are wiped in confirmed incidents |
No data is lost | Journal entries disappear permanently |
Data can be reconstructed | No recovery tools, no version history, no rollback |
System is auditor-safe | System loses data with no trace or recovery path |
System Maturity and Enterprise Readiness
| Sales & Implementation Promise | Actual Observed Behavior |
|---|---|
System is enterprise-grade | Core accounting workflows break in production |
Used by public companies | Basic intercompany and bank workflows fail |
Suitable for multi-entity organizations | Multi-entity functionality is the least stable area |
Designed for GAAP compliance | Data loss and ledger corruption violate basic accounting controls |