Bookkeeping
Match bank transactions to your cashbook and keep the unexplained rows
Match bank transactions to your cashbook for the same account and cutoff, confirming only the entries you can explain. Everything else belongs on an exception list: a difference is a question to investigate, not an amount to write off so the totals agree.
By AnyStatement
Published , 8 min read
Your statement adds up, but the cashbook still has a different balance. That can happen without either total containing an arithmetic error: a check may not have cleared, or a bank fee may not yet be in the books. You need two records, not a second copy of the bank export with categories added.
The free bank versus ledger match tool helps you compare two CSVs and review one-to-one pairs. This guide explains how to work through that comparison, but neither a proposed match nor a zero difference establishes correct expense categories, tax treatment or document authenticity. Your bookkeeper or accountant decides the accounting treatment; the bank can investigate a disputed bank entry.
Start with the bank record and your own record
Here, cashbook means the receipts and payments recorded for this bank account, whether you keep them in a spreadsheet, check register or accounting ledger. It doesn't mean a list of unpaid invoices or all activity across every account. Copying the bank CSV into another sheet won't uncover something missing from both copies.
You'll need the statement and native transaction export, the corresponding cashbook, and the previous reconciliation with its outstanding items. Intuit's bank reconciliation guide calls for the current and previous statements plus the cashbook. A check written last month can clear this month, so it mustn't disappear from the comparison just because the current cashbook export starts on the first.
- The comparison needs one account, one currency and a written cutoff date. The balance to use is the statement's closing balance at that date, not today's available balance.
- Bank posting dates and book entry dates can differ. Keep them separately so you can explain a difference rather than silently replacing one date with the other.
- Every row needs an ID and source reference. Keep the original files intact when you sort, filter or correct the working copies.
Before comparing records, check that each one adds up on its own. For this checking-account worksheet, money received is positive and money paid is negative, so opening balance plus signed movements should equal closing balance within each record. The statement balance checker covers that narrower calculation. If beginning bank and book balances differ, the previous reconciliation must explain why before you tackle the new differences.
Match references and amounts, not just similar-looking rows
A shared reference and exact signed amount make a useful candidate, but references can be reused. That's why you need the underlying evidence before confirming a pair. The IRS's Publication 583, revised December 2024, tells readers to compare both check numbers and amounts, note differences, and mark cleared checks. Matching by amount alone throws away part of that evidence.
Without a shared reference, the same amount within a plausible date window can narrow the search. It doesn't decide which payment you're looking at. Two customer receipts can have the same amount on the same day, so choosing whichever row sorts to the top would be arbitrary. A description such as “PAYMENT” adds little help.
| Status | What it means | Next step |
|---|---|---|
| Confirmed pair | Evidence links one row on each side | Retain both IDs and the reason |
| Uncertain candidate | Possible match, or several competing rows | Review references, dates and documents |
| Bank-only | No confirmed book counterpart | Investigate fees, omissions or bank errors |
| Book-only | No confirmed bank counterpart | Investigate timing, wrong account or book errors |
Each row belongs in only one confirmed pair. Bank-only and book-only mean unmatched in the supplied records, not proven missing in the real world. Until you decide an uncertain candidate, it stays unresolved and outside the confirmed-match totals, but still counts in the source totals.
A fictional September: $1,375 at the bank, $1,305 in the books
This synthetic example covers one USD checking account through September 30, 2026. Both records open at $1,000.00, with no prior outstanding items. Each CSV contains all four movements for its side of this small example. Opening and closing balances are separate controls, not transaction rows.
These are separate records, so save them as two CSVs or import them into separate worksheets. Amounts use decimal points and negative signs for payments. Keep references as text and retain the ISO dates, making sure any tool knows which date and sign conventions you chose.
Bank transactions
RowID,Date,Description,Amount,Reference
B01,2026-09-04,Cash deposit,250.00,DEP11
B02,2026-09-04,Cash deposit,250.00,DEP12
B03,2026-09-11,Supplier check,-120.00,CHECK41
B04,2026-09-30,Monthly service fee,-5.00,FEE09Cashbook transactions before the fee is recorded
RowID,Date,Description,Amount,Reference
C01,2026-09-03,Customer receipt A,250.00,DEP11
C02,2026-09-03,Customer receipt B,250.00,DEP12
C03,2026-09-10,Supplier payment,-120.00,CHECK41
C04,2026-09-30,Repair payment,-75.00,CHECK42The two $250.00 deposits are separate receipts, identified by DEP11 and DEP12, so neither should be deleted as a duplicate. For all three candidate pairs, the bank date falls one day after the corresponding book date. In the linked matcher, map the Reference column, choose “Prefer exact nonblank reference first” and set a one-day window. You can then distinguish the two receipts without changing the original dates.
| Bank row | Book row | Decision |
|---|---|---|
| B01: +$250.00 | C01: +$250.00 | DEP11 links this receipt |
| B02: +$250.00 | C02: +$250.00 | DEP12 links the other receipt |
| B03: -$120.00 | C03: -$120.00 | CHECK41 cleared one day later |
| B04: -$5.00 | None | Bank fee not yet recorded in books |
| None | C04: -$75.00 | CHECK42 outstanding at September 30 |
The example assumes deposit records support DEP11 and DEP12, check records support CHECK41, and the original statement identifies the $5.00 fee. It also assumes CHECK42 was issued and recorded before cutoff, then appears on the bank record on October 2. Those are fictional supporting facts, not documents we inspected. With only the two CSVs, the fee and outstanding-check explanations would still need confirmation.
Bank: 1,000.00 + 250.00 + 250.00 - 120.00 - 5.00 = 1,375.00
Books: 1,000.00 + 250.00 + 250.00 - 120.00 - 75.00 = 1,305.00
Unadjusted bank minus books: 1,375.00 - 1,305.00 = 70.00Both records add up internally. The three confirmed pairs total +$380.00 on each side, leaving one $5.00 bank debit and one $75.00 book debit. The $70.00 difference is the net effect of those two items, not evidence of one missing $70.00 transaction.
An outstanding check and a fee belong on different sides
An outstanding check is already in the books but hasn't cleared the bank at cutoff. It belongs as a subtraction from the bank balance on the reconciliation workpaper, not as a second payment in the cashbook. A confirmed bank fee absent from the books needs a book entry instead, because the bank has already reduced its balance.
Xero's reconciliation guide, published June 9, 2026, distinguishes outstanding checks, deposits in transit and bank-only charges. A supported deposit in transit goes the other way from an outstanding check: add it to the bank balance on the workpaper because it is already recorded in the books but not yet on the statement. None is a reason to edit the original bank statement.
| Calculation | Bank side | Book side |
|---|---|---|
| Recorded closing balance | $1,375.00 | $1,305.00 |
| Outstanding CHECK42 | Subtract $75.00 | Already recorded |
| Confirmed fee FEE09 | Already recorded | Subtract $5.00 |
| Adjusted balance | $1,300.00 | $1,300.00 |
The tool's balance bridge is different from this adjusted-balance workpaper. With the three pairs confirmed and the original closing balances entered, it calculates $1,375.00 - (-$5.00) + (-$75.00) = $1,305.00. That bridges to the unadjusted cashbook balance; it does not record the fee or calculate the $1,300.00 adjusted balance for you.
Once the $5.00 fee is supported, record it in the cashbook with its source and accounting treatment. CHECK42 stays on the outstanding list until it clears. When it appears at the bank later, that clears the existing payment; it isn't another payment to record in the cashbook.
If the $75.00 payment has no supporting record, it stays unexplained. A book-only row isn't automatically a timing difference, and the residual isn't a reason to make a balancing entry. Publication 583 instructs readers to update omitted or incorrect book entries and, if differences remain, recheck the preceding reconciliation steps. Zero is the expected result of explained differences, not a substitute for explaining them.
Sometimes one bank row belongs to several book rows
A pair matcher cannot settle a grouped deposit. In a separate fictional variation, two receipts of $200.00 and $300.00 are deposited together as one $500.00 bank credit. A deposit slip connecting both receipts to that credit would support a one-to-many match. The equality alone would not: unrelated rows can also add up to $500.00.
The two receipts and the single bank row should stay intact, with their IDs recorded under one match group alongside its supporting document. Splitting or overwriting the original bank row just to fit a one-to-one tool would change the record you're comparing. If the credit is $495.00 instead, a $5.00 fee is only a hypothesis until a settlement record or other evidence explains it. With that evidence, $200.00 + $300.00 - $5.00 = $495.00; without it, the difference remains open.
Because the free matcher is limited to one-to-one review, it doesn't handle grouped deposits or amount tolerances. These cases need a separate workpaper or your accounting system's documented grouped-matching workflow. This variation is not an additional adjustment to the September example above.
Keep enough detail for someone else to finish the review
“Unmatched” alone doesn't tell the next reviewer much. A book-only payment with a check copy is a different question from an unexplained withdrawal that appears only at the bank. Keep the side, original row ID, signed amount, date and reference alongside the proposed explanation, evidence needed and review decision.
Unresolved items need an owner and next action when you carry them forward. For a timing item, check the following bank record for clearance and investigate if it doesn't appear as expected. A suspected bank error needs its correspondence and correction reference kept with it. An item being outstanding for a while is no reason to silently remove the row.
The bank versus ledger match tool can help retain confirmed pairs and export unmatched rows, but its comparison is limited to the records you supply. Parsing errors block matching, so correct the working copy against its source rather than deleting problem rows. Even two parseable files can omit transactions. The statement review log guide gives you a way to keep decisions beside their source references.
If your history is only in PDFs, ask the bank for a native export first, or transcribe a short statement with source references. For a longer archive, a separate upload to AnyStatement can turn PDFs into reviewable Excel or CSV. You still need to check the extracted bank side against the original before comparing it with your cashbook: conversion doesn't supply the independent bookkeeping record.
What we checked
We reopened IRS Publication 583, the Intuit reconciliation guide and the Xero guide on October 18, 2026. The IRS publication shows a December 2024 revision; Xero shows June 9, 2026. Intuit's retrieved page had a “Published on” label without a date. We parsed both fictional CSVs and recomputed their counts, signed totals, closing balances, matched totals and adjusted balances with Python Decimal, including the tool's balance-bridge formula and the separate grouped-deposit arithmetic. We did not test Excel, a live QuickBooks or Xero account, or a real bank reconciliation. The supporting facts in the example are stated assumptions. Balanced arithmetic cannot authenticate documents or establish that every underlying transaction was recorded correctly.