EzzyBills and Pulsify both automate invoice processing for Australian businesses running Xero or MYOB. Both pull data off supplier invoices, apply coding, and push the result into the accounting system. They get there from different starting points, though, and if you’re dealing with freight, construction or complex supplier invoices, that difference shows up in your day. For context on how each sits in the wider market, the best AP automation software Australia 2026 guide covers the full field, and our AP software comparisons hub gathers every head-to-head in one place.
EzzyBills is built around document capture: get the data off the page accurately, apply rules, push to the ledger. Pulsify is built around what happens before approval: extract, code from supplier history, validate, flag anomalies. Which one fits comes down to where your AP process is stuck today.
What does EzzyBills do?
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 at small volumes. It’s been in the Australian market for years and has a solid reputation for clean extraction on standard invoices.
EzzyBills fits businesses whose main problem is typing. If invoice data is going into the accounting system by hand and you want that to stop, it does that job.
What does Pulsify do?
Pulsify is an AP automation platform built around three things that sit past capture: AI line-item coding from supplier history, automated vendor bank detail validation, and a configurable approval workflow with a full audit trail.
The coding engine is the main difference. Instead of a static rule saying “Supplier X maps to Account Y”, Pulsify learns from how each supplier’s invoices have been coded against your chart of accounts in Xero or MYOB, then applies those patterns. For suppliers who send a different mix of charges every time, or mixed GST across lines, that’s a different proposition to rule-based coding.
Then there’s the validation layer. Before an invoice reaches the approval queue, Pulsify compares the supplier’s bank account details against what’s on file and flags any change. Duplicate detection runs at intake as well, rather than after the bill has hit the ledger.
Pulsify integrates directly with Xero and MYOB AccountRight and Essentials.
Side-by-side comparison
| What it does | 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 whose bottleneck is manual data entry, where invoices and receipts get typed in today and accurate capture would save real hours.
It’s a reasonable fit if you’re running fewer than 60 invoices a month from consistent suppliers, or if you have a mix of supplier invoices and employee expense receipts and want mobile capture and expense claims handled alongside. The per-document pricing has to suit your volume and budget, and it works best for teams who want cleaner data in Xero or MYOB without changing how their AP process runs otherwise.
For those businesses the simplicity is an asset. Setup is quick, there’s no subscription to commit to, and the extraction quality on standard invoices holds up.
Where Pulsify is the stronger fit
Pulsify fits businesses where data capture isn’t the constraint. The problem is the accuracy and the controls between the invoice landing and the bill hitting the ledger.
Complex supplier invoices - A subcontractor invoice covering labour, plant hire and materials across different cost centres won’t survive a simple supplier-to-account rule. Nor will a freight forwarder invoice with international freight, fuel surcharges, customs clearance fees and deferred GST on imports spread across six lines, where the GST treatment changes line by line. Pulsify codes the GL account and GST treatment on each line from that supplier’s coding history, and the cost centre splits follow the same patterns you’ve coded before rather than something the AI decides on its own.
Vendor fraud risk - Payment redirection fraud works by changing a supplier’s bank account details on an invoice before it reaches the finance team. EzzyBills doesn’t compare incoming bank details against what you’ve paid before. Pulsify does, and flags any change before the invoice goes further. If your invoices are high-value, which they usually are in construction, wholesale and distribution, that’s the control that matters most.
Volume above 80-100 invoices per month - At that point per-document pricing starts to bite, and different people coding the same suppliers different ways turns into errors you find at reporting time. Understanding the real cost of manual AP helps work out when the tipping point arrives for you.
MYOB-based businesses with workflow needs - EzzyBills pushes data to MYOB without putting a full AP workflow on top of it. Pulsify’s approval workflows and coding logic run the same way on MYOB as they do on Xero, rather than being a Xero tool with MYOB bolted on.
The coding accuracy question
This is the operational difference between the two platforms.
EzzyBills codes through supplier rules. You configure a rule mapping Supplier X to Account Code Y, and invoices from that supplier get coded to it. For simple, consistent invoices that’s enough. When the same supplier sends a different mix of goods, services and charges each time, the rule falls behind, and someone reviews and corrects whatever it didn’t cover cleanly.
Pulsify works off transaction history instead. The coding it applies to a new invoice reflects how that supplier’s invoices have been coded over time: how the split between accounts was handled, which GST codes went on which lines, where each charge type ended up. Invoice consistent with history, same coding. Invoice diverges, it gets flagged for review.
You see the difference at the end of the month. Rule-based coding tends to surface its corrections during reconciliation, when the context has gone cold. Learned-history coding surfaces most of them at intake, while someone can still remember the job.
The vendor validation gap
EzzyBills doesn’t monitor vendor bank details, which is fair enough for a document capture tool. Validation sits outside what it set out to do.
The consequence is worth spelling out. If a supplier’s bank account number changes on an incoming invoice, whether that’s a genuine update or payment redirection fraud, EzzyBills extracts the new details and pushes them into the accounting system without saying anything. Nobody finds out until the payment has gone.
Payment redirection fraud cost Australian businesses AU$152.6 million in 2024. Construction, wholesale and distribution businesses are among the most targeted, because invoice values are high and supplier relationships run for years. They’re also a good chunk of who EzzyBills markets to.
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
Per-document pricing suits low to moderate volumes. There’s no fixed subscription to commit to and the cost tracks your use.
The flip side is that costs grow with volume and you don’t get anything extra for it. A business running 150 invoices a month on EzzyBills pays for 150 extractions, then still codes them by hand or by rule, and still runs approvals somewhere else. An invoice processing cost calculator helps weigh the per-document fees against the loaded cost of the steps that stay manual.
At that volume the AP automation question changes shape. It stops being about what capture costs per document and starts being about what the whole process costs you, coding time and month-end rework included.
The verdict
EzzyBills is the right call for small businesses with moderate, simple invoice volumes where the core problem is data capture. The per-document model, mobile receipt capture and expense management fit that job well.
Pulsify is the right call once the problem sits past capture: invoice complexity that needs coding from supplier history, bank detail validation as an actual control, approval workflows you can configure and audit, and enough volume that per-document pricing plus manual coding stops adding up.
Construction, freight, wholesale and industrial businesses carry the most complex invoices and the highest fraud exposure. EzzyBills will fix your data entry. Checking that the bank details on this invoice match the ones you’ve been paying for the last three years is a separate job, and that’s the one Pulsify was built for.
Also comparing: Dext vs Pulsify · Best Dext alternatives · Lightyear vs Pulsify · ApprovalMax vs Pulsify · Best AP automation software in Australia
Further reading: Best AP Automation Software Australia 2026 · Accounts Payable Software Australia: Buyer’s Guide · The Final Decisive Comparison of Invoice Processing Automation Software