Pilot vs Wave

Agent access

1. ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialprobed4/10

   A probe confirms Pilot serves an llms.txt file at HTTP 200, so an agent can indeed be pointed at it — but the content shown is minimal (just entity/category metadata, no structured docs or API references), and other agent-doc formats (docs-md, openapi) return 404. Missing for 10: substantive llms.txt content beyond basic metadata, markdown docs mirror, and any first-party statement about agent-oriented documentation strategy.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://pilot.com/llms.txt # Pilot [Entity: Pilot] [Category: Professional Services] [Subcategory: Acco…”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   A direct probe found no llms.txt file (404) and no agent-oriented docs surface; Wave's marketing pages contain no mention of llms.txt or agent-consumable documentation, and its developer portal is blocked to crawlers.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave is a small-business accounting/invoicing SaaS with no evidence of a CLI, headless mode, or CI-friendly automation surface; llms.txt and OpenAPI probes both 404, and the developer/API portal is walled off with no documented programmatic interface. Nothing suggests Wave can be run headlessly or scripted in a CI pipeline.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is a bookkeeping/accounting service with no evidence of any MCP server offering; docs mention integrations (Bill.com, Stripe, Gusto) but nothing about AI agent connectivity via MCP, and API/openapi probes returned 404s.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”
   • [claimed-docs] “We integrate with hundreds of tools like Bill.com, Stripe, and Gusto.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave is an accounting SaaS product, so an official MCP server is a plausible axis, but there is no evidence of any MCP server, API docs accessible, or agent integration; probes for llms.txt and OpenAPI both 404, and the developer portal is walled off from crawling.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence of a public API for Pilot; OpenAPI/swagger probes all returned 404 and no docs mention an API for driving the product programmatically. Pilot is a human-service accounting/bookkeeping product with integrations, not an API-driven platform.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Marketing pages document no public API, and direct probes for llms.txt/OpenAPI both 404; the developer portal exists but is blocked to crawlers so no documented, accessible API surface is evidenced.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

5. ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of any API credential system, scoped tokens, or agent-oriented access controls; Wave's role-based access is for human collaborators (admin/editor/viewer), and its developer/API portal could not even be crawled to confirm any credentialing mechanism exists.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [claimed-docs] “A perpetual free Starter plan plus a per-business Pro plan: "The subscription fee for the Pro Plan is per business, not per owner... you'd s…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

6. ai-native userBuild against official SDKs

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is a bookkeeping/accounting service with no evidence of any official SDKs; probes for API/OpenAPI specs returned 404s, and no docs mention developer SDKs.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of official SDKs for AI-native/programmatic use; llms.txt and OpenAPI probes both 404, and the developer/GraphQL API portal is walled off from crawling with no documentation surfaced. Marketing pages describe only end-user accounting features, not SDKs.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

7. ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence of any webhook subscription capability or event API; Pilot is an accounting/bookkeeping service and probes show no OpenAPI or developer API surface exists.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of webhook support anywhere in Wave's marketing pages or developer portal; the developer portal itself couldn't be crawled and is described as documenting no webhook surface, and llms.txt/openapi probes both returned 404.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agentic features

1. ai-native userGet AI-generated insights and suggestions from my data inside the product

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed4/10

   Pilot's marketing mentions 'Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead' (pilot-docs-7), which points to some AI-generated insight capability inside the product, and scenario/cash-flow modeling features (pilot-docs-8, pilot-docs-21) suggest similar analytical output, though these are framed as human CFO-delivered rather than explicitly AI-driven. There is no independent/hands-on corroboration of the AI feature actually working, and community reviews focus on bookkeeping accuracy/time savings rather than AI insights. Missing for 10: detailed documentation of the AI feature's scope/accuracy, independent user testimony specifically about the AI insights, and clarity on whether insights are AI-generated vs. human-analyst-generated.

   • [claimed-docs] “Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead”
   • [claimed-docs] “Model cash flow scenarios Know if you can afford new hires well before you make the offers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Know if you can afford new hires well before you make the offers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Track company expenses in real time Find the $2,000/month you didn't know you were wasting.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Find the $2,000/month you didn't know you were wasting.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence shows OCR data extraction and automation (auto-categorize, reminders) but no AI-generated insights, analysis, or suggestions surfaced to users; reports are static comparisons, not AI-driven recommendations. No mention of AI/ML-based insight generation anywhere in the pack.

   • [claimed-docs] “Scan unlimited receipts and bulk import up to 10 at once to save time. Our smart OCR technology extracts and organizes the data—meaning less…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background

   weight 2 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Wave~partialprobed4/10

   Wave ships several fixed, always-on background automations (auto bank import/categorization, recurring invoices with auto payment reminders, auto payroll tax filing) that run without manual triggering, per wave-docs-2, wave-docs-5, wave-docs-10, wave-docs-14. However these are hard-coded product features, not a general-purpose automation/agent framework the user can configure, and there is no API, webhook, or MCP surface documented for building custom autonomous workflows (wave-probe-1, wave-probe-2, wave-supp-dev-portal-wall). Missing for 10: a configurable automation builder, any AI-agent/orchestration capability, and a documented API/webhook layer for extending automations.

   • [claimed-docs] “Schedule reminders to automatically deploy 3, 7, and 14 days after sent invoices are due, so you don't have to keep chasing customers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect your bank accounts in seconds with the Pro Plan. Transactions will appear in your bookkeeping automatically, and you'll say goodbye …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Set up recurring invoices and automatic credit card payments for your repeat customers and stop chasing payments.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Wave’s complete payroll tax service will automatically pay and file your state and federal payroll taxes.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userDelegate tasks to a built-in AI assistant inside the product

   weight 3 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed3/10

   Pilot's pricing page mentions an AI feature offering 'Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead,' which is a thin, single-mention hint of an in-product AI assistant capable of some task-like actions (scenario modeling). There's no further documentation on scope, autonomy, or how tasks are delegated to it, and community evidence focuses on human bookkeepers/CFOs rather than the AI assistant. Missing for 10: detailed documentation of the AI assistant's task-delegation capabilities, independent/hands-on corroboration of it actually performing delegated tasks, and clarity on its scope beyond Q&A.

   • [claimed-docs] “Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack of a built-in AI assistant or agentic feature; Wave's docs describe automation (auto-import, OCR, reminders) but nothing about delegating tasks to an AI assistant, and the developer portal is inaccessible with no API/AI mention on marketing pages.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Scan unlimited receipts and bulk import up to 10 at once to save time. Our smart OCR technology extracts and organizes the data—meaning less…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect your bank accounts in seconds with the Pro Plan. Transactions will appear in your bookkeeping automatically, and you'll say goodbye …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed3/10

   Pilot's marketing mentions 'Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead,' implying some natural-language Q&A interface, but there's no evidence of broader natural-language command execution (e.g., initiating actions, workflows) or any API/CLI to support it. missing for 10: evidence of NL commands beyond Q&A, independent/hands-on corroboration, technical documentation of the AI interface, API or programmatic access.

   • [claimed-docs] “Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of any natural-language command interface, chat assistant, or AI-native control surface; Wave's marketing pages describe only manual UI-based accounting/invoicing features, and probes for llms.txt/openapi found nothing, with the developer portal walled off from crawling.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Api quality

1. ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is an accounting/bookkeeping service with no evidence of any developer API reference or runnable examples; probes for OpenAPI/docs-md all returned 404, and no evidence pack items mention an API reference.

   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   There is no evidence of an interactive API reference or runnable examples; probes for openapi/llms.txt returned 404s, and the developer portal itself is blocked from crawling with no documented API surface accessible.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Probe explicitly checked common OpenAPI/swagger endpoints and all returned 404, and no documentation mentions a machine-readable API spec. Missing for 10: any published OpenAPI/Swagger spec, API documentation, or developer portal.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Direct probes for OpenAPI/swagger specs and llms.txt returned 404s, and Wave's developer portal (GraphQL API) is blocked to crawlers with no machine-readable spec surfaced; marketing pages document no API spec at all.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userTest against a sandbox environment without touching production data

   weight 1 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of any sandbox, staging, test-mode, or dev environment for Wave; the developer portal is inaccessible and marketing pages document no API/test environment for isolating data from production.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is a bookkeeping/accounting service with no evidence of any public API, versioning scheme, or deprecation policy; probes for OpenAPI specs all returned 404s. missing for 10: any public API documentation, versioning scheme, deprecation policy, or developer-facing API references.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of versioned APIs or a documented deprecation policy; the developer/API portal is inaccessible for crawling and Wave's public marketing pages document no API surface at all, with llms.txt and OpenAPI probes both returning 404.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once

   weight 2 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is a bookkeeping/accounting service; no evidence describes any bulk-operation or batch-processing capability across items (transactions, invoices, etc.) for AI-native automation. Missing for 10: any mention of bulk edit/import/export tools, batch API operations, or automation-scale item processing.

   ⚑ flag

   Wave~partialprobed2/10

   Wave documents a narrow bulk feature (uploading up to 10 receipts at once with OCR), but there is no evidence of broader bulk operations (e.g., bulk invoice creation/edits, bulk transaction updates) or any API/CLI/MCP surface an AI-native user could script against — the developer portal is crawl-walled and no OpenAPI/llms.txt exists. missing for 10: bulk invoice/transaction/customer operations, programmatic API or CLI access for scripted bulk actions, evidence beyond the 10-item receipt cap.

   • [claimed-docs] “Scan unlimited receipts and bulk import up to 10 at once to save time. Our smart OCR technology extracts and organizes the data—meaning less…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDefine rules that trigger actions automatically on events

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is a bookkeeping/accounting service with dedicated human experts and integrations, but there is no evidence of a rules engine or automation-trigger system letting users define event-based automated actions; features described are AI Q&A and integrations, not user-defined trigger/action rules.

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave offers only a handful of fixed, vendor-built automations (recurring invoices, overdue reminders, auto payroll tax filing, bank auto-categorization) — none of these let a user define custom rules or trigger-action logic on arbitrary events. No evidence of a rules engine, webhooks, or conditional automation builder; the developer/API surface is walled off (403) and marketing pages document no such capability.

   • [claimed-docs] “Schedule reminders to automatically deploy 3, 7, and 14 days after sent invoices are due, so you don't have to keep chasing customers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Set up recurring invoices and automatic credit card payments for your repeat customers and stop chasing payments.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Wave’s complete payroll tax service will automatically pay and file your state and federal payroll taxes.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userSchedule recurring jobs or workflows

   weight 2 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Wave~partialprobed3/10

   Wave supports one narrow recurring automation — recurring invoices and payment reminders (wave-docs-10, wave-docs-2) — but there is no evidence of a general-purpose scheduler, API-triggered jobs, or workflow automation platform that an AI-native user could hook into; its developer/API surface is walled off from public documentation (wave-supp-dev-portal-wall, wave-probe-1, wave-probe-2). Missing for 10: programmable/scriptable recurring jobs beyond invoicing, API or webhook-based scheduling, and any AI/automation-platform integration evidence.

   • [claimed-docs] “Set up recurring invoices and automatic credit card payments for your repeat customers and stop chasing payments.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Schedule reminders to automatically deploy 3, 7, and 14 days after sent invoices are due, so you don't have to keep chasing customers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Ai reconciliation

1. ai-native userHave an agent reconcile a month end-to-end, matching transactions, flagging exceptions, and preparing the close for human review

   weight 3 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialcommunity3/10

   Pilot's evidence shows human bookkeepers finalize monthly books with integration-driven transaction classification (pilot-comm-1, pilot-docs-18, pilot-docs-26), which is directionally toward automated reconciliation, but there is no evidence of an autonomous agent matching transactions, flagging exceptions, and preparing a close package end-to-end without human bookkeeper involvement. Missing for 10: explicit agentic exception-flagging workflow, evidence of AI (not human staff) doing the matching/reconciliation, and documentation of an automated close-prep output for review.

   • [community] “I'm a Pilot customer... Pilot basically solved that problem. I just do my normal business and their integrations with my banks, expensify, c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Communicate directly with your team through our user-friendly portal, where you can ask questions and provide feedback on any outstanding it…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Plus stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal.”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave's evidence covers auto-import/categorization, invoicing, payroll, and receipts, but there is no mention of an AI agent performing end-to-end reconciliation, flagging exceptions, or preparing a close for human review; no automation/agent framework or API for such orchestration is documented, and the developer portal is a crawl wall with no public API/agent hooks shown.

   • [claimed-docs] “Bank feeds and auto-categorization are a paid-tier feature, stated plainly: "With the Pro Plan, automatically import, merge, and categorize …”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Bank feeds

1. founderConnect bank and credit-card accounts so transactions import automatically every day

   weight 3 · round to Wave
   Pilot✓fullcommunity7/10

   Pilot's docs and a first-hand customer testimonial confirm bank/credit-card/expense integrations automatically feed transaction data for classification, with real-time account data in the portal, eliminating manual founder bookkeeping work. missing for 10: no explicit list of supported banks, no detail on daily-sync frequency or setup flow, and no independent technical documentation beyond marketing/community claims.

   • [community] “I'm a Pilot customer... Pilot basically solved that problem. I just do my normal business and their integrations with my banks, expensify, c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “We integrate with hundreds of tools like Bill.com, Stripe, and Gusto.”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”
   • [claimed-docs] “Plus stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave✓fullclaimed8/10

   Wave's Pro Plan explicitly documents automatic daily bank/credit-card feed import with auto-merge and categorization, directly matching the story, and this is corroborated across multiple marketing pages. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on verification (e.g., user reviews confirming daily reliability) beyond vendor claims, and no detail on credit-card-specific connection flow distinct from bank accounts.

   • [claimed-docs] “Auto-import bank transactions... Auto-merge and categorize bank transactions”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect your bank accounts in seconds with the Pro Plan. Transactions will appear in your bookkeeping automatically, and you'll say goodbye …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Bank feeds and auto-categorization are a paid-tier feature, stated plainly: "With the Pro Plan, automatically import, merge, and categorize …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Categorization

1. founderGet automatic categorization suggestions for imported transactions that learn from my corrections

   weight 2 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Evidence shows Pilot's transaction classification is handled by integrations plus human bookkeepers/accountants (pilot-comm-1, pilot-docs-17), not by an AI categorization engine that learns from founder corrections. No documentation describes a self-serve ML suggestion-and-correction loop. Missing for 10: any mention of an AI/ML categorization suggestion feature, evidence of a correction/feedback loop, or founder-facing UI for adjusting categorizations.

   • [community] “I'm a Pilot customer... Pilot basically solved that problem. I just do my normal business and their integrations with my banks, expensify, c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “We integrate with hundreds of tools like Bill.com, Stripe, and Gusto.”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave~partialclaimed4/10

   Wave documents automatic bank transaction import and categorization on the Pro Plan (auto-merge/categorize), but no evidence anywhere describes the system learning from user corrections over time — a core part of the story. Missing for 10: any documentation of a learning/adaptive categorization mechanism, evidence that manual recategorization improves future suggestions, and independent/hands-on confirmation of categorization accuracy improving.

   • [claimed-docs] “Auto-import bank transactions... Auto-merge and categorize bank transactions”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect your bank accounts in seconds with the Pro Plan. Transactions will appear in your bookkeeping automatically, and you'll say goodbye …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Bank feeds and auto-categorization are a paid-tier feature, stated plainly: "With the Pro Plan, automatically import, merge, and categorize …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Reconciliation

1. accountantReconcile each bank account against the ledger with matched, unmatched, and duplicate transactions surfaced for review

   weight 3 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot's evidence describes bank/tool integrations and automated transaction classification (pilot-comm-1, pilot-docs-17) but never describes a reconciliation workflow that surfaces matched, unmatched, and duplicate transactions for accountant review. Missing for 10: any documentation or user report of a reconciliation screen or matched/unmatched/duplicate transaction handling.

   • [community] “I'm a Pilot customer... Pilot basically solved that problem. I just do my normal business and their integrations with my banks, expensify, c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “We integrate with hundreds of tools like Bill.com, Stripe, and Gusto.”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave~partialclaimed4/10

   Wave documents bank auto-import with auto-merge and categorization (implying some duplicate/match handling), but there is no evidence of a dedicated reconciliation view that explicitly surfaces matched, unmatched, and duplicate transactions for accountant review, nor of bank-to-ledger balance reconciliation reporting. Missing for 10: explicit unmatched-transaction review UI, duplicate-transaction flagging documentation, and a formal reconciliation/statement-balance-match report.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect your bank accounts in seconds with the Pro Plan. Transactions will appear in your bookkeeping automatically, and you'll say goodbye …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Bank feeds and auto-categorization are a paid-tier feature, stated plainly: "With the Pro Plan, automatically import, merge, and categorize …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Auto-import bank transactions... Auto-merge and categorize bank transactions”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Bill management

1. accountantCapture vendor bills, route them for approval, and schedule payments from one workflow

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed3/10

   Pilot's pricing page lists 'Full accounts payable' as a service line item and mentions integration with Bill.com, implying vendor bill handling, but there is no documented detail on bill capture, approval routing, or payment scheduling mechanics within a single workflow — AP appears to be a done-for-you service rather than a described self-serve workflow. Missing for 10: bill capture/OCR details, approval routing configuration, payment scheduling functionality, and any hands-on/independent confirmation of the AP workflow.

   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable Payroll administration”
   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable”
   • [claimed-docs] “We integrate with hundreds of tools like Bill.com, Stripe, and Gusto.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence only shows Wave lets users 'create unlimited... bills' as a record type (wave-docs-7); there is no mention of vendor bill capture workflow, approval routing, or scheduled bill payments anywhere in the pack. Wave's payments feature is explicitly for receiving customer payments on invoices, not paying vendors (wave-supp-payments), and no AP-specific workflow is documented.

   • [claimed-docs] “Create unlimited estimates, invoices, bills, and bookkeeping records”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave's online payments software helps you get paid quickly by bank deposit, credit card, and Apple Pay... Customers can pay instantly by cr…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Invoicing with payment collection built in: "Send professional invoices... Get paid fast via credit card, bank payment, or Apple Pay... Auto…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Payables

1. accountantSee accounts payable aging and vendor balances at any point in time

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed4/10

   Pilot advertises 'Full accounts payable' as a service feature and real-time account data access via its portal, implying some visibility into AP status, but there is no specific mention of AP aging reports or vendor balance tracking at a point in time. missing for 10: explicit AP aging report feature, vendor balance detail/history, point-in-time reporting capability, screenshots or hands-on evidence of AP aging views.

   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable Payroll administration”
   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”
   • [claimed-docs] “Plus stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence confirms Wave supports creating bills and general accounting reports (month-to-month/year-to-year comparisons), but nothing documents an accounts-payable aging report or vendor balance tracking at a point in time. Missing for 10: AP aging report, vendor balance summary/statement, point-in-time vendor ledger view.

   • [claimed-docs] “Create unlimited estimates, invoices, bills, and bookkeeping records”
   • [claimed-docs] “Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify …”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Close process

1. accountantLock closed periods so prior-period numbers cannot change without an explicit reopening

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack mentions period locking, closing periods, or preventing retroactive changes to prior-period financials; the evidence only covers bookkeeping, tax, CFO, and integration features. Missing for 10: any mention of period-lock/close controls, reopening workflow, or audit trail preventing prior-period edits.

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence Wave offers period locking or close controls; docs mention role-based access and reports but nothing about locking closed periods or preventing prior-period edits without explicit reopening.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “A perpetual free Starter plan plus a per-business Pro plan: "The subscription fee for the Pro Plan is per business, not per owner... you'd s…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. accountantRun a month-end close against a checklist that tracks reconciliations, accruals, and review sign-offs

   weight 3 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed3/10

   Pilot's monthly bookkeeping service closes books and lets customers communicate on 'outstanding items needed to finalize your books every month' via a portal, implying some close-tracking process, but there is no evidence of an actual checklist artifact tracking reconciliations, accruals, and review sign-offs as distinct trackable steps. missing for 10: explicit reconciliation checklist UI, accrual tracking, and sign-off/approval workflow evidence.

   • [claimed-docs] “Communicate directly with your team through our user-friendly portal, where you can ask questions and provide feedback on any outstanding it…”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”
   • [claimed-docs] “Plus stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of any month-end close checklist, reconciliation tracking, accrual management, or review sign-off workflow; Wave's evidence covers invoicing, payroll, receipts, and basic reports only, and it explicitly positions itself as built for small business owners rather than accountants performing formal close processes.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Collaboration

1. founderInvite my external accountant or bookkeeper with role-scoped access to review and adjust the books

   weight 3 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot's evidence describes its own bookkeeping team communicating with the founder via a portal (docs-18, docs-26) and lets customers keep QuickBooks data so any tax preparer can access it (docs-24), but there is no evidence of a feature to invite an external accountant/bookkeeper into Pilot's own system with role-scoped permissions to review or adjust books. missing for 10: any documentation of user/role invitation, permission scoping, or external collaborator access controls within Pilot's platform.

   • [claimed-docs] “Communicate directly with your team through our user-friendly portal, where you can ask questions and provide feedback on any outstanding it…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Virtually every tax preparer in the US knows how to work with QuickBooks. You’ll have the freedom to choose any tax preparer you want.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Plus stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave✓fullclaimed7/10

   Wave explicitly documents inviting an accountant/bookkeeper with role-scoped access (payroll manager, admin, editor, viewer on Pro, or free accountant/tax pro role), directly matching the story. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on verification of the invite/permissions flow and finer detail on what each role can/cannot edit.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “A perpetual free Starter plan plus a per-business Pro plan: "The subscription fee for the Pro Plan is per business, not per owner... you'd s…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Data access

1. developerPull the full general ledger and trial balance through a documented API in open formats

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence of a documented API for pulling general ledger or trial balance data; probes for OpenAPI/docs endpoints returned 404s and no API documentation is mentioned anywhere in the evidence pack.

   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence shows Wave's developer/GraphQL API portal exists but is crawl-walled and unverifiable, and explicit probes for llms.txt/openapi/swagger all return 404; no documentation confirms GL or trial balance export via API in open formats (CSV/JSON/XML). Marketing pages describe UI-based 'reports' but never reference an API endpoint for ledger/trial balance data.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Integrations

1. founderConnect my banking, payments, and payroll systems so their activity flows into the ledger automatically

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot✓fullcommunity8/10

   Pilot explicitly integrates with banking, payments, and payroll systems (e.g. Bill.com, Stripe, Gusto, 10k+ integrations) to feed real-time transaction data into the ledger, and community testimonials confirm bank/card/payment integrations auto-handle transaction classification with minimal founder effort. missing for 10: no explicit first-party detail on the breadth/setup process of bank feed connections beyond named partners, no independent audit of integration reliability at scale.

   • [claimed-docs] “We integrate with hundreds of tools like Bill.com, Stripe, and Gusto.”
   • [claimed-docs] “10k+ Integrations”
   • [claimed-docs] “If you use Gusto, we’ve partnered with Gusto to automatically apply the credit, saving you time.”
   • [community] “I'm a Pilot customer... Pilot basically solved that problem. I just do my normal business and their integrations with my banks, expensify, c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave~partialclaimed6/10

   Wave clearly documents automatic bank-feed import/categorization (Pro plan) and integrated online payments that flow directly into invoicing/accounting records, so banking and payments activity does land in the ledger automatically. However, the payroll product's features (direct deposit, tax filing, employee portal) are described in isolation with no explicit statement that payroll transactions sync into the accounting ledger the way bank/payment data does, and there's no evidence of an API/webhook layer for connecting external banking, payment, or payroll systems beyond Wave's own native modules. Missing for 10: explicit documentation that payroll runs automatically post to the general ledger, and any API/integration surface for external banking or payroll systems.

   • [claimed-docs] “Bank feeds and auto-categorization are a paid-tier feature, stated plainly: "With the Pro Plan, automatically import, merge, and categorize …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect your bank accounts in seconds with the Pro Plan. Transactions will appear in your bookkeeping automatically, and you'll say goodbye …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Invoicing with payment collection built in: "Send professional invoices... Get paid fast via credit card, bank payment, or Apple Pay... Auto…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave's online payments software helps you get paid quickly by bank deposit, credit card, and Apple Pay... Customers can pay instantly by cr…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Run payroll in minutes”
   • [claimed-docs] “Wave’s complete payroll tax service will automatically pay and file your state and federal payroll taxes.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Deposit payments directly into your employees’ bank accounts. Less work for you, and your team will love it.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Migration

1. founderMigrate historical books from another accounting system without losing transaction detail

   weight 1 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed5/10

   Pilot markets that switching providers is supported and mentions keeping existing QuickBooks account and historical data, implying migration support, but there's no detail on how historical transaction-level detail is preserved or migrated from other systems (e.g., Xero, Wave, spreadsheets) beyond QuickBooks. missing for 10: documented migration process, evidence of no data/detail loss, support for non-QuickBooks source systems, independent confirmation of successful migrations.

   • [claimed-docs] “Whether you’re starting fresh or switching providers, your dedicated accounting expert is with you from day one handling onboarding, underst…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Keep your existing QuickBooks account and historical data”
   • [claimed-docs] “Whether you're starting fresh or switching providers, your dedicated accounting expert is with you from day one handling onboarding, underst…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Whether you’re starting fresh or switching providers, your dedicated accounting expert is with you from day one handling onboarding”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave~partialclaimed3/10

   Wave mentions an 'onboarding' process for switching from other accounting software like Freshbooks, but this is a single glancing bullet point with no detail on how historical transactions, ledgers, or account balances are actually imported or whether transaction-level detail is preserved. missing for 10: documented import/migration tool, description of data mapping (chart of accounts, historical invoices, journal entries), evidence that no transaction detail is lost, and any independent user reports of successful bookkeeping migrations.

   • [claimed-docs] “Onboarding when switching from other accounting software, like Freshbooks”
   • [claimed-docs] “When you switch from another payroll software, migrating your data is simple.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Invoicing

1. founderCreate and send invoices with online payment options and see when they are viewed and paid

   weight 3 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Evidence only shows Pilot offers 'full accounts receivable' as a bookkeeping service item, but there is no mention of self-serve invoice creation, online payment collection, or view/paid tracking features for founders—Pilot is a done-for-you bookkeeping service, not an invoicing tool. Missing for 10: invoice creation UI, online payment processing, read-receipt/paid-status tracking evidence.

   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable Payroll administration”
   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave✓fullclaimed9/10

   Wave's docs directly cover invoice creation, branded templates, online payment via 'Pay now' (credit card/bank/Apple Pay), and status tracking (viewed, due, paid) plus overdue reminders — exactly matching the story. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor marketing pages.

   • [claimed-docs] “Know when an invoice is viewed, becomes due, or gets paid, so you can take the right actions to manage your cash flow.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Customers can click a “Pay now” button on invoices and pay instantly by credit card or secure bank payment (ACH/EFT) for as little as 1%2 pe…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Add your logo and brand colors to our professional invoice templates. Drag-and-drop editing makes it easy to customize!”
   • [claimed-docs] “Invoicing with payment collection built in: "Send professional invoices... Get paid fast via credit card, bank payment, or Apple Pay... Auto…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave's online payments software helps you get paid quickly by bank deposit, credit card, and Apple Pay... Customers can pay instantly by cr…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. founderSet up recurring invoices and automatic payment reminders for overdue customers

   weight 2 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Evidence mentions 'Full accounts receivable' as a service but nothing about recurring invoicing or automated overdue payment reminders specifically. Pilot is positioned as a bookkeeping/accounting service, not an invoicing tool with these automation features documented anywhere in the pack.

   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable Payroll administration”
   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave✓fullclaimed8/10

   Wave's documentation explicitly covers both halves of the story: recurring invoices with automatic credit card payments for repeat customers (wave-docs-10), and automatic overdue payment reminders scheduled at 3/7/14 days (wave-docs-2, wave-supp-invoicing). Missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor marketing pages, and detail on customizing reminder cadence beyond the fixed schedule.

   • [claimed-docs] “Set up recurring invoices and automatic credit card payments for your repeat customers and stop chasing payments.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Schedule reminders to automatically deploy 3, 7, and 14 days after sent invoices are due, so you don't have to keep chasing customers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Invoicing with payment collection built in: "Send professional invoices... Get paid fast via credit card, bank payment, or Apple Pay... Auto…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Receivables

1. accountantTrack accounts receivable with aging reports and per-customer balances

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed4/10

   Pilot's pricing page lists 'Full accounts receivable' as a service offering, confirming AR management is part of the product, but there is no evidence of specific features like aging reports or per-customer balance tracking/reporting in the evidence pack. missing for 10: documentation of aging reports, per-customer balance views, AR-specific dashboards or reports, and independent/hands-on confirmation of these features.

   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable Payroll administration”
   • [claimed-docs] “Full accounts receivable Full accounts payable”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence describes general accounting reports (cash-flow trend comparisons) and per-invoice status tracking (viewed/due/paid), but nothing in the pack specifically documents an accounts-receivable aging report or a per-customer balance summary. Missing for 10: explicit AR aging report feature, per-customer balance/statement view, any documentation naming 'aging' or customer-level receivables tracking.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Know when an invoice is viewed, becomes due, or gets paid, so you can take the right actions to manage your cash flow.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Invoicing with payment collection built in: "Send professional invoices... Get paid fast via credit card, bank payment, or Apple Pay... Auto…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Ai ledger

1. ai-native userHave an agent draft and post journal entries via the API and leave them in a review queue for my accountant

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence of any API, agent integration, or journal entry review queue functionality; Pilot is a human-service bookkeeping/accounting company with no documented API (openapi probes 404). Missing for 10: any API existence, journal entry draft/post capability, review queue workflow, agent-facing endpoints.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://pilot.com/llms.txt # Pilot [Entity: Pilot] [Category: Professional Services] [Subcategory: Acco…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of an API for posting journal entries, nor any review-queue/approval workflow; the developer portal is inaccessible (403) and marketing pages document no API/MCP/CLI surface, and probes for llms.txt/openapi return 404s.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Chart of accounts

1. accountantCustomize the chart of accounts with account types, sub-accounts, and class or tag dimensions

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot is a done-for-you bookkeeping/accounting service, so ledger customization is a fair question, but the evidence pack only mentions generic 'custom workflows and reporting' with no mention of chart of accounts structure, account types, sub-accounts, or class/tag dimensions. Missing for 10: any documentation of COA setup, account type hierarchy, sub-account creation, or class/tag dimension tagging controlled by the accountant.

   • [claimed-docs] “Custom workflows and reporting”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   The evidence pack contains no documentation of chart-of-accounts customization, account types, sub-accounts, or class/tag dimensions in Wave; it only vaguely mentions 'Tag it, track it' without describing COA structure, and positions Wave as built for non-accountants using standard double-entry books without customizable account hierarchies. missing for 10: any mention of account type management, sub-account creation, or class/tag dimension reporting.

   • [claimed-docs] “Tag it, track it, and see what's working for your business.”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Journal entries

1. accountantPost manual journal entries with balanced debits, credits, and supporting memos

   weight 3 · round to Wave
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot's evidence describes a done-for-you bookkeeping/CFO service built on QuickBooks with dedicated experts handling books, but there is no mention of any interface for accountants to post manual journal entries with debits/credits and memos. Missing for 10: any UI or workflow for manual JE creation, debit/credit balancing, or memo attachment.

   • [claimed-docs] “Keep your existing QuickBooks account and historical data”
   • [claimed-docs] “Virtually every tax preparer in the US knows how to work with QuickBooks. You’ll have the freedom to choose any tax preparer you want.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Communicate directly with your team through our user-friendly portal, where you can ask questions and provide feedback on any outstanding it…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave~partialclaimed3/10

   Wave explicitly markets itself as 'real, double-entry accounting software,' implying journal-entry mechanics under the hood, but no evidence pack item documents a manual journal-entry screen, debit/credit balancing UI, or memo field for such entries. Missing for 10: explicit manual journal entry feature documentation, debit/credit balance validation details, memo/note field support, and any independent or hands-on confirmation of this specific workflow.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Ai audit

1. ai-native userHave an agent monitor the ledger and flag anomalies in spend or duplicate transactions before the close

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Pilot's evidence covers bookkeeping, tax, CFO services, and AI Q&A on transactions, but there is no mention of an autonomous agent that monitors the ledger, flags spend anomalies, or detects duplicate transactions before close. missing for 10: anomaly-detection feature, duplicate-transaction flagging, any agentic monitoring capability, pre-close audit workflow evidence.

   • [claimed-docs] “Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead”
   • [claimed-docs] “Track company expenses in real time Find the $2,000/month you didn't know you were wasting.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Communicate directly with your team through our user-friendly portal, where you can ask questions and provide feedback on any outstanding it…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of any AI agent, anomaly detection, duplicate transaction flagging, or automated audit monitoring capability; Wave's evidence covers manual/human-facing bookkeeping, invoicing, payroll and receipts features only, plus a note that its API/developer surface is not documented publicly.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Bank feeds and auto-categorization are a paid-tier feature, stated plainly: "With the Pro Plan, automatically import, merge, and categorize …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Audit trail

1. accountantSee a complete audit trail of who changed what and when across the entire ledger

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack describes any audit trail, change history, or user-activity logging feature within Pilot's platform; the material focuses on bookkeeping services, integrations, CFO advisory, and tax credits. Missing for 10: any mention of audit logs, change tracking, user attribution, or timestamped edit history across the ledger.

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence shows multi-user role access (admin/editor/viewer, accountant access) but nowhere documents an audit trail or change log tracking who edited what and when across the ledger. No mention of audit logs, version history, or edit tracking exists in the pack.

   • [claimed-docs] “A perpetual free Starter plan plus a per-business Pro plan: "The subscription fee for the Pro Plan is per business, not per owner... you'd s…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Multi entity

1. accountantManage multiple legal entities and produce consolidated financials across them

   weight 2 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialclaimed4/10

   Pilot's FAQ mentions it can provide consolidated reporting for US entities with foreign subsidiaries, but there is no evidence of multi-entity management for domestic entities, no detail on consolidation methodology, and no independent/hands-on corroboration of this feature. missing for 10: multi-entity dashboard/management capability, domestic multi-entity consolidation support, detailed consolidation workflow, independent verification.

   • [claimed-docs] “We can also provide US entities with foreign subsidiaries with consolidated reporting.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave's pricing is explicitly per-business (subscribe and pay separately for each business), with no mention of consolidation, inter-entity eliminations, or a multi-entity reporting view; evidence explicitly frames Wave as built for individual small business owners, not multi-entity accounting.

   • [claimed-docs] “A perpetual free Starter plan plus a per-business Pro plan: "The subscription fee for the Pro Plan is per business, not per owner... you'd s…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence of any public API for Pilot; probes for OpenAPI/swagger endpoints all returned 404, and all documentation describes only the human portal/UI and service offerings. missing for 10: any documented API, API parity claims, or developer endpoints.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Evidence shows no accessible API documentation (developer portal returns 403, no OpenAPI/llms.txt found), and marketing pages document no API/CLI surface that would let users mirror UI actions programmatically. There's no evidence of API parity with UI features like invoicing, payroll, or bank feeds.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   While Pilot mentions QuickBooks compatibility and tax-preparer portability, there is no evidence of a dedicated data export feature, open-format export (CSV/JSON/API), or a documented process to fully extract and leave with all financial data; probes even show no public API/OpenAPI spec.

   • [claimed-docs] “Keep your existing QuickBooks account and historical data”
   • [claimed-docs] “Virtually every tax preparer in the US knows how to work with QuickBooks. You’ll have the freedom to choose any tax preparer you want.”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://pilot.com/faq.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack of a data export feature (e.g., CSV/QIF export, open-format backups) or data portability tooling; marketing pages focus on invoicing, payroll, receipts, and payments with no mention of exporting or leaving with your data, and the developer/API surface is walled off (403) with no llms.txt or OpenAPI found. Missing for 10: any documented export-to-open-format feature, data portability docs, or migration-out tooling.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack addresses data residency, region selection, or storage location controls; Pilot is an accounting/bookkeeping service with no mention of infrastructure or data-residency options. Missing for 10: any documentation of data storage regions, residency guarantees, or configurable data location.

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack mentions data residency, regional storage options, or compliance controls for choosing where data is stored; Wave's marketing pages focus entirely on accounting/invoicing/payroll features with no privacy-posture or data-location documentation.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userControl data retention and deletion

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack addresses data retention policies, deletion controls, or privacy settings for Pilot's AI features or data; the pack only covers accounting, bookkeeping, and tax service offerings. Missing for 10: any documentation of data retention/deletion controls, privacy settings, or data handling policies for AI or customer data.

   ⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave is a small-business accounting/invoicing product with no evidence of any data retention or deletion controls, privacy dashboard, or export/erasure tooling in its marketing pages; the developer portal is inaccessible and no API/CLI/MCP docs exist to inspect further.

   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Ai insights

1. ai-native userAsk an agent "can we afford X?" and get an answer grounded in live ledger data pulled through the API

   weight 3 · round to Pilot
   Pilot~partialprobed4/10

   Pilot advertises an in-app AI feature offering 'Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead,' which aligns with the 'can we afford X' query use case, but there is no evidence this is exposed via an API for external agents to query — the openapi probe returned 404s and no API/agent-integration docs exist. missing for 10: evidence of a public API/endpoint an external AI agent could call, documentation of grounding in live ledger data via API, and any independent confirmation the AI answer feature works as described.

   • [claimed-docs] “Instant AI answers about past transactions and current cash flow, plus run scenarios to plan ahead”
   • [claimed-docs] “Model cash flow scenarios Know if you can afford new hires well before you make the offers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Know if you can afford new hires well before you make the offers.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://pilot.com/openapi.json, https://pilot.com/swagger.json, https://pilot.com/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   No evidence of any AI agent, chat interface, or query capability grounded in live ledger data; the probes show no llms.txt/OpenAPI surface exposed on marketing domain, and the developer/GraphQL API portal is walled off from crawling with no documented AI integration. Marketing pages only describe reports/dashboards, not agent-accessible querying.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.waveapps.com/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.waveapps.com/openapi.json, https://www.waveapps.com/swagger.json, https://www.waveapps.c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Honest crawl-wall note: Wave's developer portal (developer.waveapps.com, the documented home of its GraphQL API) answers HTTP 403 Forbidden …”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Custom reports

1. accountantBuild custom reports filtered and grouped by class, location, or tag dimensions

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Pilot—none0/10

   Evidence only mentions generic 'custom workflows and reporting' (pilot-docs-10) with no mention of class, location, or tag dimension filtering/grouping capabilities typical of QuickBooks-style reports; missing for 10: any documentation of dimension-based (class/location/tag) filtering or grouping in reports.

   • [claimed-docs] “Custom workflows and reporting”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave—none0/10

   Wave's evidence pack shows only basic month-to-month/year-to-year comparison reports; there is no mention of class, location, or tag-based report filtering/grouping, which is a QuickBooks/Xero-style feature Wave does not advertise (Wave is explicitly positioned as not built for accountants' advanced needs).

   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify …”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Statements

1. founderGenerate an accurate P&L, balance sheet, and cash-flow statement for any period on demand

   weight 3 · round to Wave
   Pilot~partialcommunity5/10

   Pilot's bookkeeping and CFO service pages reference real-time account data, custom workflows/reporting, and budget-vs-actuals/scenario planning, implying standard financial statements are produced as part of monthly bookkeeping, and community reviews confirm books are kept accurate and up to date. However, no evidence explicitly confirms generation of a P&L, balance sheet, and cash-flow statement for any arbitrary period on demand. Missing for 10: explicit documentation of the three core statements, confirmation of on-demand/any-period generation (vs. standard monthly close), and independent verification of statement accuracy/timeliness.

   • [claimed-docs] “Custom workflows and reporting”
   • [claimed-docs] “stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal”
   • [claimed-docs] “Custom financial model with strategic insights Budget vs actuals variance analysis Scenario planning model”
   • [claimed-docs] “Plus stay up to date with real time account data directly in the portal.”
   • [community] “I'm a Pilot customer... Pilot basically solved that problem. I just do my normal business and their integrations with my banks, expensify, c…”
   • [community] “Pilot customer here; they are amazing. It's pretty different from a regular bookkeeper largely in that Pilot is super accurate and timely. M…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Wave~partialclaimed6/10

   Wave uses real double-entry accounting and explicitly offers accounting reports with month-to-month/year-to-year comparisons to identify cash flow trends, implying core financial statements are generated from bookkeeping data. However, evidence never explicitly names or confirms a formal P&L, balance sheet, and cash-flow statement generated on-demand for any custom period — only general 'accounting reports' are described. Missing for 10: explicit documentation of P&L/balance sheet/cash-flow statement outputs, ability to select arbitrary custom date ranges, and independent/hands-on confirmation of statement accuracy.

   • [claimed-docs] “"Wave uses real, double-entry accounting software. Don't know what that is? No sweat. Accountants do, and they'll thank you for it." Positio…”
   • [claimed-docs] “"Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Our robust small business accounting reports are easy to use and show month-to-month or year-to-year comparisons so you can easily identify …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag