For firms and finance departments closing more than one entity
We build the close your finance team runs on. You keep the code.
Entity by entity, against your own chart of accounts and your own approvers. The AI drafts and proposes; deterministic code calculates and checks; a named person approves anything that reaches the ledger.
Nothing reaches the ledger without a name against it.
Every finance-automation pitch eventually meets the same question from an auditor, a sponsor or a partner: who approved this, and on what basis. Most answer it with marketing copy. The system underneath this one answers it with a test that fails the build.
That rule holds across every workflow we build, and there is no setting that turns it off.
Why it matters commerciallyFirms that cannot evidence their controls end up buying software they must then defend by hand. The evidence is the product.
- Four-tier action gate
- Every action is classified into one side-effect tier. Ledger and customer-facing writes are proposal-first. An unrecognised action fails closed into the most-gated tier.
- Preparer and approver
- Review policy per entity, with role floors and per-check materiality overrides, and the two roles separated wherever the control requires it.
- Readable proposals
- Before and after, the source data, the risk level, the role required to approve, a content fingerprint, an expiry, and the execution record.
- One audit chain
- The prompt, the run, each tool call, the proposal, the approval or rejection, the sync — recorded as one chain you can walk backwards.
- Circuit breaker
- When a task’s accuracy degrades, the system revokes that task’s autonomy and alerts. It can only demote. It can never promote itself.
- Grounded answers
- Answers cite period, basis, source reference and sync timestamp. Anything the system could not verify is marked as unverified.
Four steps, each bought on its own.
Nobody is ever asked for the whole thing at once. You stop wherever it stops being worth it, and what you have already paid for keeps working — because you own it.
On priceThe build and the run are scoped and quoted per engagement. The first two steps are fixed, and the first is free.
Close teardown
Free · 45 minutes · five a month
You bring your close — the checklist, the calendar, the entity you argue with most — and we go through it together. No access, no credentials, nothing installed.
One written page: where the hours go, which entities do not tie, and which AI questions you cannot yet answer.
Close and controls diagnostic
Read-only access · two to three weeks · credited in full against the build
Our tooling run against your actual books, with one detection-only control left running when we are done.
An entity-mismatch map, the errors it found, a controls assessment, and a priced build plan.
The build
One workstream at a time · source code yours · support included
One workflow from the diagnostic, built against your entities, calendar, materiality thresholds and approvers. Each additional workstream costs less, because the control plane and the approval plane already exist.
Working software in your environment, and the source that produced it.
Running it, and handing it over
Monthly · evidence pack each close
We keep it working, or we work inside your close. Those are two different services and they are priced differently. Either way your team learns how it was built, not only how to operate it.
Because you own the code, leaving is always an option.
Would rather build it yourself? The Sprint is the same foundation without us — the platform source, the runtime controls, 1,903 tests and a guided builder that writes your build instructions. One firm, unlimited seats, and the code is yours.
A finance function ran its close on this platform.
Project Falcon: a finance team inside a private equity portfolio, closing on real books against real deadlines. Four of the controls above were verified against the source code rather than described in a deck.
It also surfaced depreciation and ASC 842 errors the previous process had not caught.
One engagement is one engagement. Read it as evidence that the loop runs on real books under real deadlines — not as a benchmark, a forecast, or a figure to carry into your own model. Your own baseline gets measured before a build starts, so the comparison is yours rather than ours.
The controls are the same. What they do for you is not.
One frame covers all three: you close more than one entity, and someone above you will ask how the number was produced. What sits on top of that rule depends on whose close it is.
PE-backed portfolio companies
The sponsor’s questions arrive on a schedule.
- Close cockpit, generated and hard-locked per period
- Covenants computed between reporting dates
- Thirteen-week cash from each entity’s own behaviour
- Add-on onboarding, and an evidence binder for diligence
Fractional CFOs
You cannot hire your way to the eleventh client.
- One reporting cadence across every company
- Weekly exception review instead of reading registers
- Handoff packages assembled from current state
- Cost attributed per entity, because you bill per entity
Accounting firms and CAS
Your name is on the number.
- Classification that learns from your corrections
- Reconciliation sessions, schedules, ASC 842 and 606
- Preparer and approver separated, per client
- Your written AI policy, ahead of 15 December 2026
Four instruments. None of them ask for your email.
Each runs in your browser, takes a few minutes, and ends on a workpaper about your own position rather than a brochure about ours. Nothing you type is sent anywhere.
Or just talkA close teardown is forty-five minutes on your actual close, and you leave with one written page. Free, five a month.
| Instrument | For | What it returns | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Evidence Test | PE-backed · corporate | Seven control expectations from the 2026 ICFR frameworks, and the ones you cannot evidence, in fixing order. | 4 min |
| The AI Register | Firms · CAS teams | Every AI tool touching client work, its terms and its treatment in the books — the inventory a quality management evaluation asks for. | 90 sec |
| The Handover Test | Fractional CFOs | What a client could not do without you, in the order worth fixing — which is the same list as what is stopping the next engagement. | 3 min |
| The Control Diagnostic | Any close | Twelve questions across six control layers. Names the layer least ready to carry your AI — no averaged score, no maturity badge. | 6 min |
After the instruments, what you buy depends on which seat you sit in. Portfolio finance teams and fractional CFOs buy a diagnostic, then a build, then a run — the four rungs are here. Firms buy tools they run themselves, and those are here. Either way the teardown is free and comes first.
Built by people who ran the close, not people who read about it.
Byram Advisory Group comes out of private equity and portfolio-company finance — building FP&A systems, tightening reporting cadences, running month-end close, and cutting manual finance work out of the calendar.
What became obvious almost immediately is that none of this holds up without data integrity. Everyone was building the demo. Very few were building the part underneath it: a defined structure for what is stored, credentials kept where credentials belong, and a record of what happened that somebody could be walked through afterwards.
So we build the unglamorous half first, and we teach it the same way.
“Most people building with AI right now are popcorn builders. It looks impressive, it goes up fast, and it’s mostly air.”
Owen Byram, founder
Between the systems, and in front of a buyer.
Not everything is a close. Two service lines sit alongside it, and both are quoted per engagement.
Custom workflow builds
The problem is rarely any single tool — it is the work stuck between them. We connect the systems you already run on, automate the handoffs your team does by hand, and pull what matters into one place.
Fewer manual handoffs and real capacity, without new hires or another spreadsheet.
Diligence and buyer-readiness
Capital gets raised, a loan gets taken, an offer arrives — and the books suddenly have to answer to a lender, an investor or a sponsor. For a firm we work behind you and it goes out under your name. For a finance team, beside yours.
Clean, documented financials that survive the questions, with every balance backed by support a reviewer can follow.
Bring your close. Leave with one page about it.
Forty-five minutes, live, on the close you actually run. Not a demo and not a discovery call. You get the written page whether or not anything else follows, and there is no version of this where you have to buy something to see what we found.
No access, no credentials, nothing installed. You share a screen and we talk.