The fallacy of “Good Enough”: Why a 1% reconciliation error rate is an existential threat

Discover why a seemingly minor 1% reconciliation error rate in financial data isn't just a small oversight—but a potentially existential threat to your business. Learn the hidden risks and why "good enough" is never enough in high-stakes environments.

Amrit Mohanty

Aug 21, 2025

Some say, “Perfection isn’t possible—1% is good enough.”

But in payments? That 1% can quietly turn into millions of dollars slipping through the cracks. And it’s not just about the money—small reconciliation errors can snowball into compliance issues, strained audits, and even reputational damage that takes years to repair.

At Optimus, we’ve seen this story unfold across banks, fintechs, and enterprises. On paper, a 1% error rate looks harmless. In reality, it’s an existential threat.

Why “just 1%” is never just 1%

Think about the scale we’re operating in today. Visa alone processed 234 billion transactions in 2024—that’s over 600 million per day. On those volumes, even a fraction of a percent isn’t noise—it’s a signal. Source

And the risk isn’t hypothetical. Benchmarks show duplicate or erroneous disbursements affect 0.8% to 2% of payouts, depending on maturity. If your GPV is $5B, a “tiny” 1% reconciliation miss could expose $50M in hidden leakage.

This is why CFOs we work with treat reconciliation health like a P&L line—not an operational side-note.

Explore how Optimus powers Ledgers & Reconciliation with near-perfect accuracy.

The hidden dangers of settlement delays

Now, let’s talk about settlement. Delays are not just operational headaches—they compound risk.

Cross-border friction: Only about 6% of B2B payments settle within an hour. The rest drag into days, creating mismatches between cash and books.
Acquirer practices: Many acquirers still delay merchant settlement (e.g., T+1) to manage their own liquidity risk. That’s float on your money.
Audit exposure: Under PCAOB rules, even the possibility of reconciliation weakness—without a single misstatement—can trigger an adverse audit opinion. Recent cases (UBS, Macy’s) show how quickly this turns into reputational fire.

Every unreconciled balance that ages is not just a cash flow problem—it’s a potential audit red flag.

Legacy systems weren’t built for this data explosion

Finance teams are drowning in complexity. The average enterprise now runs 4+ gateways, 3–4 acquirers, and 5+ payment methods. Each comes with its own file formats, fees, and reconciliation quirks.

Legacy, batch-based systems just weren’t designed for this level of data detail. The result?

Missed anomalies.
False declines and over-corrections.
Hours of wasted exception management.

It’s why we see so many teams accepting “good enough” when they know they’re only reconciling 90–95% of their flows.

But ask yourself—would you ever accept “95%” accuracy in your revenue numbers?

A better way forward: near-perfect reconciliation

The future isn’t about spreadsheets, scripts, or late-night fire drills. It’s about intelligent automation.

At Optimus, we design reconciliation with:

N-way traceability from order to GL.
AI-driven matching that accounts for time zones, FX, and tolerances.
Fee validation down to the line-item, auto-flagging overcharges.
Real-time dashboards that show where settlements are lagging and why.

This isn’t “nice to have.” For CFOs, it’s a fiduciary responsibility to ensure every cent is accounted for.

CFO checklist: how to calculate the true cost of “small” errors

Here’s a simple framework:

1. Direct leakage = GPV × error rate × (1 – recovery rate)

2. Working capital drag = unreconciled value × days outstanding × cost of capital

3. Compliance & scheme penalties = probability × expected fine/fees

4. Operational costs = exceptions × minutes per case × FTE cost

When you run the math, 1% stops looking “negligible.” It looks like tens of millions in exposure.

Dive deeper: Unreliable Invoices & Fee Overcharge Risks

Final thought

A 1% reconciliation gap is not just an ops issue. It’s a strategic risk that affects liquidity, compliance, and trust.

“Good enough” data may have worked when you had one bank and one acquirer. But in today’s multi-PSP, multi-currency world, only near-perfect is good enough.

The CFOs who act on this now—by investing in automation, AI, and real-time reconciliation—will not just prevent losses. They’ll unlock a faster close, cleaner audits, and the confidence to scale without fear of hidden gaps.

Because in payments, a missing 1% is never missing for long—it’s accumulating somewhere, and it will eventually show up on your books. The question is: will you find it before your auditor does?

Read more on Optimus: