maesn
Cash Flow Management

Agicap builds the deep accounting integrations it needs, with Maesn.

Agicap is a cash flow and liquidity platform for the office of the CFO: forecasting, payments and transfers, collections, receivables, payables and bank reconciliation with one solution. Agicap works together with Maesn to establish deep and complex accounting integrations for multiple markets, to reduce the maintenance effort on their side and keep the focus on their core product.

Book a demoRead the key facts
The Agicap wordmark above an abstracted treasury dashboard: a bar chart with a trend line over the months, a table of cash rows beneath it, and a small record card docking onto the panel through a thin line.
Trusted by winning software teams
HubSpotTipaltiPaywiseRallyQredNordhealthFindityFintoClockinHEROHolviLanes & PlanesAgicapHubSpotTipaltiPaywiseRallyQredNordhealthFindityFintoClockinHEROHolviLanes & PlanesAgicap
Key facts

Who Agicap is, and which part is ours

Website
agicap.com
About Agicap
A French cash flow and liquidity platform with over 8.000 clients in 12 countries, which describes itself as Europe's leading provider of cash flow management software for SMBs and mid-market companies. Its own summary: the platform connecting banking and accounting flows to unlock trapped liquidity.
Use cases
payment reconciliation, bank reconciliation, journal posting, accounts receivable, accounts payable and agent enablement.
Previous solution
Integrations built in-house. The decision to work with a partner came from the maintenance they needed and the overhead around it, not from the first build.
The problem

Maintenance is the part nobody quotes

An integration is quoted as a build and lived with as an obligation. Agicap had shipped its own, which is why the argument here is not about the first connector but about the ones that were already live.

A treasury platform does not want one object out of an accounting system, it wants a set: what was booked, who it was booked against, what is still open. Every system names those differently, exposes them differently, and changes them on its own schedule. That is the work that does not end when the connector ships, and it is the reason Agicap decided the accounting side was not the place to spend its own engineering.

How Maesn solves it

The booking fits because the mapping came first

Agicap pulls the mapping data it needs while the customer is connecting, and that is what lets the journal entry it posts afterwards carry the right account from the start.

AT CONNECTChart of accountsTax ratesCompanyTHE JOURNAL ENTRYBACKDATEVExact OnlineJOURNAL ENTRYAccountTax rateAmountBooked against the account that came back

The chart of accounts is readable on 19 of the 30+ connected systems and a journal entry can be written on ten, and every one of those ten also returns the chart of accounts it has to be booked against. Tax rates come back on twelve.

What comes back during authentication is the chart of accounts, the tax rates and the company they belong to. It arrives through the same connection the customer just approved, so there is no separate mapping step and nothing for the customer to fill in by hand. The common data model is what makes those three arrive in one shape rather than one per product, and one authentication is what makes the moment they arrive the same moment everywhere.

The concrete flow has variants, and they follow the customer rather than the platform. On some, the accounting system books the bank transactions itself and Agicap only posts the result. On others, Agicap posts them from its own bank connectivity, and that needs a target system which accepts an open transaction rather than a finished booking: DATEV Unternehmen Online, Exact Online, Lexware Office and sevdesk take one today. The same connection serves both shapes.

Connecting through a partner does not cost Agicap the standing it would have had on its own. It gets DATEV Schnittstellenanbieter even though the integration runs through Maesn, and beyond that it can be listed in the DATEV marketplace, subject to the prerequisites DATEV sets on its side.

What changed

The maintenance moved to the other side of the API

Nothing about Agicap's product changed. What changed is who carries the accounting connections when a system ships a release nobody asked for.

The reason this decision is worth reading twice is that Agicap was not starting from zero. It had built integrations, so it knew exactly what it was buying out of: not the first build, which any competent team manages, but the standing obligation behind every connector that is already live. That is an engineering argument before it is a commercial one, and it is the same one on the page for product and engineering teams.

What the platform gets in exchange is room to be end to end. A cash forecast is only as good as the ledger behind it, collections only work with the counterparty attached, and reconciliation is worthless if the result cannot be written back. Those are three different objects moving in two directions, and they now arrive in one shape from every system a customer happens to keep.

Agicap case study FAQ

Common questions

What does Agicap connect to through Maesn?

The accounting systems its own customers keep, across several markets. Agicap had written integrations itself before, so the decision was not about the first build but about the upkeep behind every connector that is already live.

What comes back when a customer connects?

The mapping data the posting depends on: the chart of accounts, the tax rates and the company they belong to. That happens during authentication rather than as a separate setup step, which is what lets Agicap write a journal entry that already carries the right account. The chart of accounts is readable on 19 of the 30+ connected systems and tax rates on twelve.

Who books the bank transactions?

That differs per customer, and both shapes exist. Either the accounting system books them itself, or Agicap posts them from its own bank connectivity. The second needs a system that accepts an open transaction rather than a finished booking, and four of the connected systems do.

What gets written back?

The journal entry. It can be created on ten of the 30+ connected systems, and every one of those ten also returns the chart of accounts it has to be booked against. Counting the other documented write paths alongside it, booking proposals, payments and open transactions, seventeen can take a write of some kind.

Does integrating through Maesn cost Agicap the DATEV partner status?

No. Agicap gets DATEV Schnittstellenanbieter even though the integration runs through Maesn, and it can be listed in the DATEV marketplace on top of that, subject to the prerequisites DATEV sets on its side.

Could another treasury platform use the same setup?

The objects are the same wherever cash is planned outside the ledger: the mapping that makes a posting valid, the booking itself, the counterparty and what is still open. What differs is which systems the customers keep and whether the platform brings its own banking connection, which is a coverage question rather than an integration one.
Other case studies
TipaltiAutomates the full accounts payable cycle and posts every payment back into the customer's ERP.Read the case studyClockinTurns tracked project time into draft invoices inside the accounting system the customer already runs.Read the case studyPaywisePulls overdue invoices out of the customer's ledger so collection can start without a manual upload.Read the case study
Ship your ERP and accounting integrations. Connect once.
Book a demo