Esker vs Mekorma vs Airbase for AP Automation

For a 3-person AP team processing 1,800 invoices per month across two Sage Intacct entities, Esker's document recognition engine (Esker Synergy AI) extracts invoice data using machine learning and deep learning, then populates a structured validation form that clerks review before posting. Invoices that clear all configured business rules pass through without human touch, while those that trigger exceptions are routed to a clerk's validation queue. On the validation form, the clerk sees the auto-extracted field values and can correct them against the original invoice image side-by-side. Esker also documents that its AI engine can 'detect unusual amounts' and 'suggest coding information,' and that first-time recognition and machine learning are used to improve the extraction recognition rate over time. The functional effect is that high-confidence invoices bypass manual review entirely (Esker claims 80%+ touchless rates), and only exception invoices land in the clerk's queue. However, the documented mechanism describes an invoice-level exception/touchless split rather than an explicit per-field confidence percentage score displayed inline on every field: published documentation describes a validation form populated with extracted data for clerk review, not a UI that color-codes or numerically scores each individual field so clerks can selectively verify only the uncertain fields on an otherwise parseable invoice.

For your 3-person AP team processing 1,800 invoices per month, the relevant question is whether Airbase surfaces per-field confidence scores so clerks know exactly which extracted values to verify rather than checking every field on every invoice. Airbase's bill capture module uses AI-powered OCR and machine learning to auto-fill key invoice fields such as vendor name, invoice date, amount, and line items, and applies ML-based predictive GL coding that learns from past coding corrections. However, no source found, across Airbase's own product pages, marketing materials, OCR-specific blog content, or third-party reviews, documents a mechanism that displays per-field confidence scores, color-codes extraction certainty, or routes individual low-confidence fields to a targeted clerk review queue. What is documented is that the system auto-fills fields and flags potential policy issues or anomalies, but this falls short of the field-level confidence signaling the buyer is asking for.

For your 3-person AP team at a $120M Sage Intacct shop, Mekorma's invoice capture capability has two compounding problems. First, Mekorma's Invoice Capture product is built exclusively for Microsoft Dynamics GP and, via a partnership with SignUp Software, for Dynamics 365 Business Central. There is no Mekorma invoice capture module designed for or integrated with Sage Intacct, which is your ERP of record. Second, even within the Dynamics GP product where Invoice Capture does exist, the mechanism works as follows: Microsoft AI Builder and Power Automate extract invoice data from a dedicated email inbox and push it into a Mekorma Invoice Capture Validation window inside GP, where AP staff manually review and adjust the extracted data before creating a transaction. Mekorma's own documentation states it brings through only a narrow fixed set of fields (Invoice Number, Invoice Date, Amount, and Due Date) from the AI Builder output. The validation window is an undifferentiated review queue: every invoice lands there and clerks review all fields. No per-field confidence scores, color-coded extraction quality indicators, or selective verification signals are documented anywhere in Mekorma's help center across multiple product builds (x90 through x98). There is no mechanism to tell an AP clerk which fields the AI extracted with high confidence versus which need manual verification.

For a 3-person AP team at a $120M multi-location services company currently sending remittance advice manually (or not at all), Esker addresses supplier payment visibility primarily through its supplier portal rather than through event-triggered outbound remittance delivery. Esker's AP automation module gives suppliers direct, self-service access to invoice and payment status via an online portal, reducing inbound status inquiry calls to the AP team. Separately, Esker's Synergy AI layer can automatically sort and generate responses to inbound supplier inquiries about payment status, including overdue payment reminders and payment confirmation questions. Neither mechanism constitutes an automatic outbound remittance advice sent to the vendor at the moment of payment execution: the portal is a pull model requiring the supplier to log in, and the AI inquiry responder is reactive rather than event-triggered. No documentation found in Esker's AP or Payments product pages, help center, or the fact sheet's supporting tier describes a payment-event-triggered email with a structured remittance document (invoice number, amount, discount, net paid) delivered automatically to the vendor's email address upon check print or ACH release.

For a 6-location services company processing 1,800 invoices per month across two Sage Intacct entities, Airbase addresses vendor payment notification primarily through its Vendor Portal. The portal's feature list explicitly includes the ability for vendors to 'track payment status' and 'receive notices of new invoice payments,' meaning vendors enrolled in the portal get alerted when a bill is paid. Airbase also maintains a dedicated knowledge base article titled 'Vendor Payment Notifications' in its Paylocity support center, confirming this is a named, documented capability rather than an incidental feature. However, the delivery mechanism is portal-centric: vendors must be invited to and enrolled in the Airbase Vendor Portal to receive these notices, and there is no publicly documented evidence of a standalone outbound remittance email sent directly to a vendor's email address on file independent of portal enrollment. The depth of remittance detail in the notification (e.g., invoice number, payment amount, line-level breakdowns, deductions) is not specified in any accessible documentation.

This buyer runs Sage Intacct across 2 entities. Mekorma is built exclusively for Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, Dynamics GP, and Acumatica; it has no product, module, or certified integration for Sage Intacct. Within its supported ERP platforms, Mekorma does offer automated EFT remittance delivery: the system generates a PDF remittance and emails it to the vendor's address on file at the time of payment processing, and its Remote Payment Services (RPS) module sends remittance emails automatically for ACH and virtual card payments. However, none of this mechanism is accessible to a Sage Intacct environment. Automatic remittance advice delivery to vendors upon payment is therefore not available to this buyer through Mekorma.

For a multi-location services company whose approvers travel across 6 offices, Esker's AP workflow module includes a delegation of authority feature that allows an approver to designate a backup user for a defined date range directly from their user profile settings. During the active delegation window, the system routes both pending and newly arriving invoice approval tasks to the named substitute rather than the original approver; when the end date passes, routing automatically reverts to the original approver without manual intervention. This operates at the system level, meaning the substitute receives actual approval authority in the workflow queue rather than a forwarded email notification. Esker's approval engine is rules-driven and configurable, routing invoices based on business rules, entities, amounts, and cost centers, so delegation slots into the same workflow logic that governs the broader approval chain across both Sage Intacct entities.

For a multi-location services company managing AP approvals across 3 staff members and 6 locations, Mekorma does offer a documented out-of-office approval delegation mechanism within its Dynamics GP product. Mekorma Payment Hub allows approvers to delegate their approval responsibilities while out-of-office. The approver self-configures the delegation directly in the Mekorma User Preferences window: they check the box 'Enable Out-of-Office Re-Route of Approval' and use the look-up to select the desired delegate. Critically for the buyer's requirement, the approver chooses the date range for which they would like the delegate to approve on their behalf, and clicking OK puts the delegation into effect for the designated time period. All delegate-approved payments are tracked separately: if the out-of-office feature is in use, delegates are listed for all payments they approve in the Mekorma Audit Log. However, this entire mechanism is built for Microsoft Dynamics GP and Business Central. The buyer's ERP is Sage Intacct, which Mekorma does not support, meaning none of this delegation functionality is accessible in the buyer's actual environment.

For a 3-person AP team at a 6-location services company, approval continuity during PTO is a real operational risk: a single absent approver can stall a bi-weekly check run or delay a subcontractor payment. Airbase does offer a 'delegated access' feature that lets a user grant a teammate restricted access to their Airbase account, and its Advanced Approvals module supports approval groups where any one member of the group can act, which partially addresses coverage during absences. However, three targeted searches of Airbase's help center and product documentation found no description of a user-initiated, time-bounded delegation that reroutes invoice approvals to a named backup for a defined period and then automatically expires and reverts authority to the original approver. The account-level 'delegated access' documented on Airbase's feature pages is described as assistance for busy executives managing their own expenses, not as a PTO-triggered approval-queue handoff with a start date, end date, and automatic reversion.