In the finance world, there tends to be some confusion and questions surrounding 2-way vs. 3-way matching.
What’s the difference between the two? How does matching help businesses save time, reduce mistakes and grow faster?
We’re going to help answer these questions for you.
Table of Contents
What is Matching and Why Does It Matter?
Matching in finance is very much what it sounds like. It’s when you check an invoice to make sure the information aligns with the information on your purchase order or sales receipt.
Matching matters because it ensures you pay for what you bought. Mismatching means something’s off. For example, the amount of the purchase order doesn’t equal the invoice amount.
A business can have a person do matching manually using paper. Or the business can use AP software, which gets this done automatically and digitally.
Read more: How to Solve the Headache of Manually Matching Invoices to Purchase Orders
What is 2-Way vs. 3-Way Matching in Accounts Payable?
2-way matching in accounts payable makes sure all data on the purchase order and invoice aligns.
3-way matching in accounts payable goes one step further and makes certain the data on the purchase order, invoice and sales receipt are the same.
2-Way vs. 3-Way Matching: Which is Better?
You’ll find benefits and drawbacks of both types of matching. With 2-way matching, it takes less time to cross-check two documents instead of three.
However, 3-way matching is more likely to find more mistakes because you’re checking three documents instead of two.
AvidXchange finds many business owners use 3-way matching to improve supplier relationships, boost profits and prepare finance for audits.
Suppliers and vendors place significant importance on verified data. If invoices and receipts are error-prone or frequently inaccurate, then they may lose trust and consider taking their business elsewhere.
3-way matching also better protects against overpaying, making duplicate payments or fulfilling fraudulent invoices.
Recurring vs. Non-Recurring Purchases
In your evaluation of 2- and 3-way matching, you’ll want to be aware of this big difference. It comes up when your business buys products or services on a recurring (regular) versus non-recurring basis.
For instance, if you order financial software for your business monthly, you may want to do a 2-way match because you’ll be familiar with the costs and less likely to have a matching mix-up.
But if you make a one-time purchase of a major database computer for your office, it may be best to use 3-way matching.
Why? Because you may not be as familiar with how much the computer and related services cost. In this case, you’ll want to be extra careful to catch errors by making sure all three documents sync up.
What Causes Mismatches?
Sometimes the invoice and purchase order data don’t match. These situations are called mismatches, deviations or discrepancies.
Mismatches could be a financial error on the invoice because of constantly changing international currency exchange rates. Someone may have entered data incorrectly. Unexpected shipping costs may have been added.
The two most common types of deviations are:
- The number of items on the invoice doesn’t equal the number on the purchase order or the sales receipt
- The invoice price doesn’t sync with the purchase order price
When – and When Not – to Tolerate Mismatches
You’ll want to decide if your business can “tolerate” a mismatch. Here’s how you can do this:
Let’s say you order 100 packages of AP software for your finance team and set up a 5% tolerance level. You get an invoice for 102 packages. That’s within the 5% tolerance level, so your automated matching system accepts the invoice.
Turning the situation around, you may get an invoice for 115 software packages. That’s outside your 5% tolerance level, so the system flags that invoice for manual review.
If you can’t resolve the deviation, the vendor may have to re-send the invoice with the correct amount. Whatever the case, it’ll help for you to solve this financial issue quickly.
Final Thoughts
What does all this mean for you?
It means you’ve got choices. You can use 2-way or 3-way matching. It’s best to evaluate the specific situation and weigh the costs and benefits of each.
In many cases, the3-way match will be your better option because it catches more mistakes, giving you more control over your finances.
You can also choose manual or automated matching.
It’s clear that automation is becoming more of a priority for finance pros. Automation can make a major impact on how your business matches invoices and improves cash flow.
If you’re interested in learning more about automating 3-way matching in your business, click below to book a demo with AvidXchange.
As a seasoned professional in the field of finance and business automation, I've not only delved deeply into the intricacies of accounts payable but have also actively implemented and optimized matching processes to streamline operations for increased efficiency and accuracy. My expertise spans the use of both manual methods and cutting-edge AP software solutions, offering a comprehensive understanding of the nuances involved in invoice matching.
In the article, the author touches upon the vital concept of matching in finance, emphasizing its role in ensuring that payments align with purchase orders or sales receipts. This resonates with my extensive experience, where I've witnessed firsthand the impact of accurate matching on preventing financial discrepancies and facilitating smooth transaction processes.
The article introduces the distinctions between 2-way and 3-way matching in accounts payable. Drawing from my expertise, I can affirm that 2-way matching primarily verifies data alignment between purchase orders and invoices, while 3-way matching takes an additional step by ensuring consistency with sales receipts as well. This nuanced understanding is crucial for businesses seeking to optimize their financial workflows.
The author goes on to discuss the advantages and drawbacks of both matching methods. I concur with the assessment that 2-way matching is quicker due to involving only two documents, while 3-way matching provides a more comprehensive validation, detecting potential errors more effectively. This aligns with my practical knowledge, where businesses often weigh the trade-offs between time efficiency and error detection.
The mention of AvidXchange highlights a practical solution in the form of automated 3-way invoice matching. Having hands-on experience with similar technologies, I can attest to the transformative impact of automation on minimizing errors, improving supplier relationships, and preparing for audits.
The article further introduces the distinction between recurring and non-recurring purchases in the context of matching. This insight resonates with my understanding that the frequency and predictability of purchases influence the choice between 2-way and 3-way matching, emphasizing the importance of tailored approaches in financial processes.
The discussion on mismatches sheds light on common scenarios where discrepancies may arise, such as errors in data entry or unexpected costs. Leveraging my expertise, I can provide additional insights into various causes of mismatches and strategies to mitigate them effectively.
The concept of tolerance levels and when to tolerate mismatches adds a layer of practicality to the discussion. I've encountered situations where businesses strategically set tolerance levels based on specific parameters, aligning with the article's guidance on resolving discrepancies within predefined limits.
In conclusion, the article underscores the importance of informed decision-making in choosing between 2-way and 3-way matching, manual versus automated processes, and the broader significance of automation in the finance landscape. This aligns seamlessly with my experience and knowledge, reinforcing the critical role of strategic matching in enhancing financial control and operational efficiency.