Unusual account or document type
A late entry to an account that is not normally part of close may require a different explanation from a standard depreciation journal.
Period-end activity testing
Review Xero and QuickBooks transactions posted close to month end
Datplan counts selected accounting records within a configurable number of days of each month end. The chart shows timing concentrations across the period, and Audit Evidence lets the reviewer inspect the entries behind a spike.
How do I review period-end accounting activity?
Choose a comparable population and reporting period, select the number of days around month end, review months with unusual concentration, then open Audit Evidence. Trace the entries to their accounting purpose, source documents, approval, platform history and any subsequent reversal or correction.
Cut-off and timing
Decide which date and window answer the audit question
A period-end test becomes ambiguous when the selected date field is not documented or the window is wider than the risk requires.
| Design choice | Question to answer | Common interpretation risk |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Are you testing journals, sales, purchases, payments or another comparable class? | Routine close journals can overwhelm unusual operational transactions when mixed together. |
| Date field | Does the procedure concern accounting date, document date, payment date or system-entry timing? | A backdated document may have a period-end accounting date but a later creation timestamp. |
| Window | Should the test cover the final day, final three days or another period around month end? | A long window may classify normal monthly activity as a cut-off exception. |
| Comparison basis | Are months being compared by count, value, transaction class, account or user? | A count spike can consist of many immaterial routine entries; a value spike may be driven by one valid item. |
| Year end or ordinary month end | Does the risk increase at a formal reporting deadline? | Year-end close processes often differ substantially from an ordinary month and need their own expectation. |
Investigation sequence
Explain the month-end concentration before judging it
- Set an expectationUnderstand the normal close timetable, recurring journals and reporting deadlines.
- Select the population and dateDocument what one row represents and why the chosen date is relevant.
- Choose the cut-off windowUse enough days to capture the risk without turning the test into a general monthly transaction count.
- Review the pattern across monthsIdentify isolated spikes, persistent close-day concentration and changes from prior periods.
- Open Audit EvidenceInspect account, document type, amount, counterparty, reference and other available fields.
- Trace the entryCheck source support, authorisation, business purpose, settlement and platform history.
- Look after period endReview reversals, credits, corrections or settlement that clarify the original posting.
- Document the resultRecord whether the timing was expected, erroneous, a control exception or unresolved.
Common legitimate month-end activity
- Accruals and prepayments
- Depreciation and amortisation
- Payroll and tax postings
- Bank and control-account reconciliations
- Foreign-exchange revaluation
- Revenue or cost allocation
- Inventory and work-in-progress adjustments
- Corrections identified during close
Patterns that may justify follow-up
Combine timing with value, account, user and subsequent events
Large or round values
Material estimates and clean round values can be valid, but the basis, approval and later true-up should be visible.
Review round amounts →Post-period reversal
A prompt reversal can be expected for an accrual or can indicate that the original entry needs investigation. Review both sides and the business rationale.
Unfamiliar counterparty
A high-value period-end transaction with a rarely used supplier or customer combines timing and relationship risk.
Review rare counterparties →Xero and QuickBooks
Keep the analytical question consistent and the source evidence specific
Datplan provides the same period-end analysis for supported Xero and QuickBooks populations. The accounting platform can expose different document classes, dates, user history and audit information, so corroboration must use the source's own records and reports.
For Xero, review the relevant transactions, reports, documents and available history. For QuickBooks, also distinguish Datplan's transaction analysis from the separate QuickBooks Audit Log.
A month-end spike is not itself a misstatement
Closing entries are expected. The review becomes useful when the timing is combined with accounting purpose, value, authorisation, source support and subsequent activity.
Related tests
Follow the characteristic that needs a separate answer
Possible duplicates
Review repeated records posted near the same cut-off and determine whether they represent one obligation, a correction or valid separate items.
Review possible duplicates →Round amounts
Review whether month-end estimates or manual entries cluster at selected round-number multiples.
Review round amounts →Rare high-value counterparties
Prioritise large period-end entries involving counterparties that occur infrequently in the selected population.
Review rare counterparties →Period-end questions
Design a timing test that matches the close process
What does the period-end activity test measure?
It counts transactions posted within a configurable number of days of each month end for the selected Xero or QuickBooks population. The chart helps the reviewer see whether activity concentrates near reporting cut-offs.
Does a month-end posting indicate fraud or earnings management?
No. Accruals, depreciation, payroll, tax, reconciliations, corrections and routine close entries often occur at month end. The timing is a reason to inspect context, not a conclusion about intent or accuracy.
Should I review transaction date, posting date or creation time?
Use the date field that responds to the procedure and is available in the selected source population. The accounting date, document date, payment date and system creation or modification timestamp can answer different questions.
Can the test compare Xero and QuickBooks clients?
The same conceptual analysis is available for both sources, but posting practices and available date fields can differ. Apply consistent reasoning without assuming the underlying source fields are identical.
What should be checked after a period-end spike?
Inspect the accounts, document types, values, users, counterparties, approvals, supporting documents, later settlement, corrections and post-period reversals behind the spike.
Inspect the transactions behind period-end spikes
Use the configurable Xero or QuickBooks analysis to locate unusual timing, then review the accounting and source evidence behind each result.