EzzyBills and Pulsify both automate invoice processing for Australian businesses running Xero or MYOB. Both extract data from supplier invoices, apply coding, and push results into the accounting system. The comparison matters because they arrive at similar outcomes from fundamentally different product philosophies - and for industrial businesses dealing with freight, construction, or complex supplier invoices, that difference is operational.
EzzyBills is built around document capture: get data off the page accurately, apply rules, push to the ledger. Pulsify is built around the full pre-approval control stack: extract, code intelligently from supplier history, validate before approval, flag anomalies. Which one fits depends on where the real constraint sits in your AP process.
What EzzyBills does
EzzyBills is a cloud-based document capture and data extraction tool for Australian small businesses. Its core function is OCR extraction from invoices, receipts, and expense documents - it reads the PDF or image, extracts key fields (supplier, date, total, GST), applies account codes from supplier rules, and pushes to Xero, MYOB, or QuickBooks Online.
The platform includes mobile receipt capture, expense claim handling, and a basic approval step. Pricing is per document, which keeps costs low for businesses processing small volumes. It has been in the Australian market for a number of years and has a reliable reputation for clean data extraction on standard invoices.
EzzyBills fits businesses that need better data capture than manual entry provides - where the primary problem is getting invoice data into the accounting system accurately without someone typing it in.
What Pulsify does
Pulsify is an AP automation platform built around three functions that go beyond data capture: AI line-item coding from supplier history, automated vendor bank detail validation, and a configurable approval workflow with a full audit trail.
The AI coding engine is the core differentiator. Rather than applying static rules - “Supplier X maps to Account Y” - Pulsify learns from how each supplier’s invoices have actually been coded in Xero or MYOB and applies those patterns automatically. For suppliers with variable invoices, multi-line charges, or mixed GST treatments, this is materially different from rule-based coding.
The second differentiator is the validation layer. Before any invoice reaches the approval queue, Pulsify compares the supplier’s bank account details against historical records and flags any change. It also runs duplicate detection at intake, not after ledger entry.
Pulsify integrates directly with Xero and MYOB AccountRight and Essentials.
Side-by-side comparison
| Capability | EzzyBills | Pulsify |
|---|---|---|
| Invoice OCR extraction | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile receipt capture | Yes | No |
| Expense claim management | Yes | No |
| AI coding from supplier history | No | Yes |
| Rule-based account coding | Yes | Yes |
| GST at line level | Basic | AI-learned, with flagging |
| Vendor bank detail validation | No | Yes |
| Duplicate detection at intake | Basic | Yes, pre-approval |
| Approval workflow | Basic | Yes, configurable |
| Audit trail depth | Extraction record | Extraction + validation + approval |
| Multi-entity support | Limited | Yes |
| Xero integration | Yes | Yes |
| MYOB integration | Yes | Yes (AccountRight + Essentials) |
| Pricing model | Per document | Subscription |
Where EzzyBills is the stronger fit
EzzyBills suits small businesses where the primary problem is manual data entry - where invoices and receipts are currently being typed in, and accurate automatic capture would save meaningful time.
It is a reasonable fit for:
- Businesses with fewer than 60 invoices per month from consistent, simple suppliers
- Operations with a mix of supplier invoices and employee expense receipts, where mobile capture and expense claim handling are useful alongside invoice processing
- Businesses where the per-document pricing model aligns with invoice volume and budget
- Teams that want cleaner data in Xero or MYOB without changing their broader AP process
For these businesses, EzzyBills’s simplicity is an asset. The setup is straightforward, the per-document model avoids subscription commitment, and the extraction quality on standard invoices is solid.
Where Pulsify is the stronger fit
Pulsify fits businesses where the constraint is not just data capture but the accuracy and controls sitting between invoice receipt and ledger entry.
Complex supplier invoices - A subcontractor invoice covering labour, plant hire, and materials on different cost centres cannot be handled by a simple supplier-to-account rule. A freight forwarder invoice with international freight, fuel surcharges, customs clearance fees, and deferred GST on imports across six line items requires split coding with different GST treatments per line. Pulsify’s AI coding handles these because it learns from the actual coding history, not from a static rule.
Vendor fraud risk - Payment redirection fraud is the mechanism where an attacker changes a supplier’s bank account details on an invoice before it reaches the finance team. EzzyBills does not compare incoming bank details against historical records. Pulsify does, flagging any change before the invoice proceeds. For businesses processing invoices above $10,000 - common in construction, wholesale, and distribution - this control is directly relevant.
Volume above 80-100 invoices per month - At this volume, per-document pricing becomes material, coding inconsistency across team members compounds into reporting errors, and the manual steps that EzzyBills still requires at the coding stage become the daily bottleneck. A platform that codes from learned history rather than static rules reduces that bottleneck.
MYOB-based businesses with workflow needs - EzzyBills pushes data to MYOB but does not provide a full AP workflow on top of it. Pulsify’s approval workflows and coding logic are fully functional on MYOB - not a Xero-first tool adapted for MYOB use.
The coding accuracy question
This is the central operational difference between the two platforms.
EzzyBills applies account codes through supplier rules: you configure a rule that maps Supplier X to Account Code Y, and invoices from that supplier are coded accordingly. For simple, consistent invoices, this works. For invoices where the same supplier sends different mixes of goods, services, and charges each time, the static rule cannot keep up - someone still has to review and correct the coding on anything the rule does not cover cleanly.
Pulsify learns from transaction history. The coding pattern it applies to a new invoice reflects how that supplier’s invoices have actually been coded over time - including how the split between accounts was handled, which GST codes were applied to which lines, and which cost centres each charge type maps to. When the invoice is consistent with history, the AI coding is applied automatically. When it diverges, the system flags it for review.
The practical difference is visible at the end of month. Businesses on rule-based coding typically find coding corrections during reconciliation. Businesses on learned-history coding find most corrections at intake, before the bill is published.
The vendor validation gap
EzzyBills does not include automated vendor bank detail monitoring. This is not a criticism of the product - it is a document capture tool, and vendor validation is outside that scope.
The operational consequence is straightforward: if a supplier’s bank account number changes on an incoming invoice - whether through a legitimate update or through payment redirection fraud - EzzyBills will extract the new details and push them to the accounting system without flagging the change. The finance team may not notice until the payment has been made.
Payment redirection fraud cost Australian businesses AU$152.6 million in 2024. Construction, wholesale, and distribution businesses - exactly the industries where EzzyBills is used - are among the most frequently targeted sectors, because invoice values are high and supplier relationships are ongoing.
Pulsify flags any change to a supplier’s bank account details before the invoice enters the approval queue. That flag catches both legitimate supplier updates that need confirmation and fraudulent substitutions before any payment is authorised.
The per-document pricing model
EzzyBills’s per-document pricing is appropriate for businesses processing low to moderate invoice volumes. It removes the fixed subscription commitment and scales proportionally with use.
The flip side: as invoice volume grows, per-document costs grow with it - without any additional capability accruing. A business processing 150 invoices per month on EzzyBills is paying for 150 extractions, still doing the coding step manually or via static rules, and still managing approval outside the platform.
At that volume, AP automation becomes a different calculation. The question is not just “what does data capture cost per document?” but “what does the full AP process cost - including the manual coding time, the risk of a missed fraud signal, and the month-end rework from inconsistent coding?”
The verdict
EzzyBills is the right choice for small businesses with moderate, simple invoice volumes where the core problem is data capture - replacing manual entry with accurate automatic extraction. The per-document model, mobile receipt capture, and expense management features suit this use case well.
Pulsify is the right choice for businesses where the problem goes beyond data capture: where invoice complexity requires AI coding from supplier history, where vendor bank detail validation is a real risk control, where approval workflows need to be configurable and auditable, and where the volume makes per-document pricing and manual coding steps unsustainable.
For construction, freight, wholesale, and industrial businesses - the sectors where AP complexity and fraud exposure are highest - the gap between document capture and full AP automation is where payments go wrong. EzzyBills closes the manual entry problem. Pulsify closes the controls problem that sits between invoice receipt and payment.
Also comparing: Dext vs Pulsify · Lightyear vs Pulsify · ApprovalMax vs Pulsify · Best AP automation software in Australia