What “integrates with” actually means
Two compliance tools can both say they integrate with Xero Practice Manager and mean completely different things. One writes a PDF into a file note. One starts the compliance work the moment you create the client. Both get the same tick on a comparison table.
This page is about the category, not about us. If you are evaluating any AML tool, these are the four questions that separate the two.
Why the count is the wrong measure
The number every vendor puts on the page is how many integrations they have. It is the least useful number available. A tool listing fifteen integrations where each one copies a spreadsheet on a schedule is doing less for you than a tool listing one that starts work automatically.
The question that actually decides how much staff time you spend is not whether the two systems are connected. It is which one is in charge afterwards.
The four questions
- Where does the record live afterwards? After the integration runs, which system holds the authoritative client record — yours, or theirs? If the answer is theirs, you now maintain two client lists, and the one your team works from every day is the copy.
- Which way does the data move? Reading from your system is easy. Writing back into it is harder and much more useful. Ask specifically which fields are written, not whether it is “two-way”.
- Can it create a record, or only update one? This is the question almost nobody asks, and it is the one that separates the tiers. A tool that can only update records you have already typed still leaves you typing every new client twice. A tool that can originate a record means a new client can arrive through onboarding and land in your practice system correctly the first time.
- What starts the work? A sync is not a trigger. If a person still has to remember to press something, the integration has moved data but not removed the work. Ask what event in your own system kicks the process off.
The five tiers
Answer the four questions and any tool lands on one of these. Most of this market sits at tier 2.
| Tier | What it does | System of record | How to tell |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 None | No connection. Every client is typed into a second system by hand. | the tool | No integrations page, no API documentation, no app-store listing. |
| 1 Export | A CSV out of one system and into the other. A person moves the file. | the tool | "Export to CSV" is the only thing on the integrations page. |
| 2 Sync | Data is copied between the systems on a schedule or a button press. The compliance record lives in the vendor tool; your practice system holds a copy. | the tool | The word "sync" or "connect", with no description of what is written or what starts it. |
| 3 Writeback | The result is written into the record in your system, so the answer is readable where you work. But the work still starts in the vendor tool. | split | Named fields, or a document appearing against the client. Ask what triggers it. |
| 4 Native | An event in your system starts the work, and the tool can create records in your system. You never leave the software you already run. | your system | A documented event trigger, and the ability to originate a record — not just update one. |
The jump that matters is 2 to 4, and it is not incremental. Tier 2 makes the vendor's tool the place your compliance truth lives. Tier 4 leaves it where the rest of your practice already is.
The second dimension — how much actually lands
The tier tells you the mechanism. It does not tell you how much of the client arrives, and that turns out to be the bigger difference. Two tools can both create a record in your system and one of them can be doing a fraction of the work.
The reason this matters more in compliance than in most software: the output of a due diligence check is a structure, not a record. A company client comes with a trustee, beneficial owners and the relationships between them. A tool that writes back one verified individual has moved a fragment and quietly dropped the shape.
- Which fields does it write? Basic contact fields, the full standard set, or extended data?
- Can it use custom fields? No practice system has a native home for beneficial-ownership data — so a tool limited to standard fields is storing compliance information in a name-and-address shape.
- Which entity types can it create? Individuals only, or companies, trusts and partnerships too?
- Can one workflow create several linked records? The company and its beneficial owners, or one at a time?
- Do the relationships survive? Five unlinked records is not a modelled group, and the difference only shows up under review.
What this looks like in practice
These are real, and each is checkable against the vendor's own published material on the date noted. They are not criticisms — a tier-2 integration is a legitimate product decision, and for a small practice it may be plenty. They are examples of how far apart two things called “an integration” can be.
Annature's Xplan and Worksorted integrations deliver the completed verification as a PDF into the client's file notes. The document is where you can find it, which is genuinely better than nothing. But nothing in Xplan knows a verification happened — you cannot filter on it, report on it, or trigger anything from it. The compliance state stayed in the vendor's system; only the paperwork moved. Verified 23 Aug 2026 against Annature's own integration documentation.
easyAML lists fifteen practice-management integrations. Two of the fifteen are marked live by easyAML itself; the others are listed. A listing page is a roadmap as often as it is a feature, and the honest question to ask any vendor is which of the logos on the page you can use this month. Verified 23 Aug 2026 against easyaml.com.
When Annature built AML writeback into Xero Practice Manager and FYI, they polled their customers on whether to design their own fields or wait for the host platforms to publish a structured AML schema. Customers said don't wait. That is a genuine engineering decision and it is worth respecting — and it also means the fields are the vendor's invention rather than something your practice system natively understands. Verified from Annature's published changelog, July 2026.
AMLHub's Australian and New Zealand sites carry no reference to Xero, MYOB, Karbon, FYI, Zapier or an API, and no developer documentation. Every client is entered by hand into a separate portal. For a firm doing twenty clients a year that is a manageable amount of typing. For a thirty-partner firm it is a full-time job nobody was hired for. Verified 22 Aug 2026 across both amlhub.co.nz and amlhub.com.au.
Questions worth asking any vendor
- After a verification completes, where does the authoritative record live — in your system or in mine?
- Which named fields do you write back, and can I report on them?
- Can you create a new client record in my practice system, or only update one I have already created?
- What event in my system starts the work? If the answer is “the user clicks”, it is a sync.
- Which of the integrations on your website can I use this month?
- If I leave you, what happens to the compliance records — and do I pay to get them out?
Answers to these are checkable and specific, which is why they are more useful than asking whether a product “integrates”.
Where StackGo sits, and who else is up here
We are tier 4, and we would rather you check it than take it from us. Your practice system stays the source of truth — we are explicitly not trying to become your client repository.
We are not alone up here, and you should know that. 2Shakes, Seamlss and OnboardMe all document creating client records in a practice system from their own onboarding flow. If you are comparing us to one of those three, this page will not settle it — go and compare on the things that actually differ. What the ladder tells you is that most of this market is not at tier 4 at all, and that is worth knowing before you shortlist.
One honest caveat about the fourth question. For Xero Practice Manager specifically, nobody has a true native event trigger, including us — Xero publishes no XPM webhooks, so there is no event for any vendor to subscribe to. Anyone claiming otherwise is describing a trigger inside their own product. Karbon does publish contact webhooks, so it is possible there; as far as we can tell nobody has built it yet.
Why one client is usually five records → · See how specific tools compare →
Ready to make onboarding minutes, not hours?
Start free and run your first check today, or book a demo and we will walk you through it.