Pulsify vs Datamolino: an honest comparison for bookkeepers and product-heavy businesses
Pulsify vs Datamolino is a practical comparison for bookkeepers and small businesses deciding how to handle invoice processing as volumes and complexity grow. It breaks down where Datamolino works best for structured data capture and pre-accounting, and where Pulsify goes further with accounts payable automation, complex invoice logic, freight invoices, and multi-account, multi-tax scenarios. The guide is written for real-world workflows, especially product-based and e-commerce businesses, and helps readers understand which tool fits their clients, their invoice mix, and the way they actually work day to day.
21 January 2026
If you’re a bookkeeper or a small business owner dealing with invoices all day, you already know this feeling. Most documents are fine. Boring, even. Then a freight invoice lands in your inbox with five tax treatments, three accounts, a fuel levy, and a credit tucked in the corner. That’s where tools either help or quietly fall apart.
This comparison is for people who live in that reality.
Both Pulsify and Datamolino aim to reduce manual data entry and tidy up your bookkeeping workflow. But they’re built with very different assumptions about how messy real invoices actually are.
Let’s talk about what that means in practice.
Quick context: why this comparison matters
Datamolino has been around for a while. Many bookkeepers use it as a reliable capture and pre-accounting tool. It focuses on getting documents into Xero cleanly and consistently.
Pulsify is newer. It’s Australian-built and comes from a slightly different angle. Instead of asking “how do we extract data faster?”, it asks “how do we handle the invoices that slow teams down the most?”.
That difference shapes everything.
The core difference, in plain English
Here’s the simplest way to think about it:
Datamolino is strong at structured capture and review before pushing data into your ledger.
Pulsify is built for accounts payable automation where invoices vary wildly, need logic, and often need judgment.
Neither approach is wrong. But one may fit your day-to-day better than the other.
Invoice capture and data extraction
Datamolino’s approach
Datamolino focuses on extracting header data and line items with consistency. It works well when:
Supplier formats are predictable
Tax treatments are straightforward
Coding rules don’t change often
You get a clean pre-accounting layer where bookkeepers can review, adjust, and approve before syncing to Xero.
For many practices, that’s enough. Especially if clients send neat invoices and don’t run complex supply chains.
Pulsify’s approach
Pulsify assumes invoices will be messy.
It handles:
Multi-account splits on a single invoice
Multiple tax rates across line items
Freight, landed cost, and surcharge scenarios
Invoices that don’t quite add up at first glance
Instead of just extracting data, Pulsify applies bookkeeping logic during processing. It’s closer to bookkeeping AI than simple capture.
That matters when invoices aren’t polite.
Freight invoices and landed costs
This is where the gap becomes obvious.
Datamolino
Freight invoices can be processed, but they usually require more manual intervention:
Splitting freight across accounts
Adjusting GST or zero-rated lines
Checking totals against expectations
It works, but bookkeepers still spend time thinking through each one.
Pulsify
Freight invoices are a core use case.
Pulsify was designed around:
Multiple tax line items on the same invoice
Automatic allocation across accounts
Clear visibility into how totals were calculated
For e-commerce, wholesale, and manufacturing businesses, this saves real time. Not seconds. Hours.
Approval workflows and exception handling
Datamolino
Datamolino offers a structured review process. Bookkeepers can:
Review extracted data
Fix errors
Push documents through once approved
If something looks off, it’s flagged visually and corrected manually.
Pulsify
Pulsify treats exceptions as first-class citizens.
It uses confidence signals to decide:
What can flow through automatically
What needs a human look
What should be blocked entirely
This is subtle, but important. Instead of reviewing everything, teams focus only on invoices that actually need attention. That’s a big shift for accounts payable automation.
Multi-entity and multi-account setups
Datamolino
Datamolino supports multiple clients and entities, but workflows tend to stay similar across them. Coding rules are helpful, but complex inter-entity logic still lives in the bookkeeper’s head.
Pulsify
Pulsify is built with multi-entity businesses in mind:
Group structures
Shared suppliers
Different tax treatments by entity
Different approval paths per entity
If you manage multiple businesses under one umbrella, this matters more than most marketing pages admit.
Integrations with accounting systems
Both tools integrate with Xero.
Pulsify also supports MYOB and is actively expanding its accounting AI integrations to suit Australian businesses that still rely heavily on inventory and service bills.
Datamolino stays focused on doing one thing well inside its supported ecosystem, which some practices prefer.
Day-to-day experience for bookkeepers
Here’s where tone matters.
Datamolino feels familiar. Calm. Predictable. It fits neatly into an existing bookkeeping process without asking you to rethink much.
Pulsify feels more opinionated. It nudges you toward letting software handle the boring logic so you can focus on judgment calls. Some bookkeepers love that. Others take a week or two to trust it.
That trust usually grows once they see how it handles the ugly invoices.
Reporting, visibility, and audit comfort
Datamolino
You get clear document trails and structured reviews. Auditors like that. So do cautious bookkeepers.
Pulsify
Pulsify adds another layer: why a decision was made.
For each invoice, you can see:
How line items were classified
Why certain approvals were triggered
Where confidence was high or low
That transparency is key when bookkeeping AI starts doing more of the thinking.
Pricing philosophy
Exact pricing changes, so this isn’t about numbers.
Conceptually:
Datamolino prices for document capture and pre-accounting efficiency.
Pulsify prices for accounts payable automation value, especially on complex invoices.
If most of your invoices are simple, Datamolino can feel like better value. If complexity is your bottleneck, Pulsify often pays for itself quickly.
Who Datamolino is best for
Datamolino is a solid fit if:
Your clients send mostly clean invoices
Coding rules are simple and stable
You want a familiar, low-friction tool
You prefer reviewing most documents manually
Many bookkeeping firms happily sit here and see no reason to change.
Who Pulsify is best for
Pulsify shines when:
You deal with freight, landed costs, or split invoices daily
You manage product-heavy businesses
You want fewer touchpoints, not just faster data entry
You’re open to bookkeeping AI doing more of the groundwork
It’s especially useful as a companion or replacement when tools like Dext or Hubdoc struggle with complex documents.
A quick word on Dext, Hubdoc, and the bigger picture
A lot of firms don’t use just one tool anymore.
Some use Datamolino for structured capture, Dext for receipts, and still handle messy invoices manually. Pulsify often comes into those setups specifically to deal with what the others don’t handle well.
That’s not accidental. It’s where most time is lost.
The honest takeaway
This isn’t about which tool is “better”.
It’s about what kind of invoices you actually process.
If your workday is full of predictable supplier bills, Datamolino will feel comfortable and efficient.
If your stress comes from the 20 percent of invoices that take 80 percent of your time, Pulsify was built with you in mind.
And if you’re a bookkeeper thinking, “Honestly, I just want fewer fires to put out,” that difference matters more than any feature list.
Other Blog Posts
Read other articles