Data access requirements
Define who can access which information and how it may be handled before implementation.
Software for financial and advisory firms
Custom AI workflows
on your infrastructure.
Kairon Insights develops and supports software for document-intensive financial and advisory work. Models, document processing, and data storage run within your enterprise environment, keeping confidential client information and material nonpublic information (MNPI) under your control.
Designed for local deployment under your security policies.
Company A / Deal materials
Company_A_CIM.pdfFY2025 · Selected source01
Company_A_CIM_v2.pdfSame period, unconfirmed version?
Company_A_QoE.pdfFY2025 · Adjusted earnings03
Operating_model.xlsxFinancials worksheet04
CIM · p. 24 → Financials!F12
Deal review workbookFY2025 · USD m
Financials!F12FY2025 · USD millions · Source attached
One discrepancy held for reviewAdjusted earnings need the team’s judgment.
Financial &
professional services
- Boutique & middle-market investment banks
- Independent private equity
- Valuation & transaction advisory
- Specialist professional services
For fully local client deployments
Local processing and storage, without cloud AI services.
Core processing operates without an internet connection.
External services introduce additional data-handling and vendor-review requirements. In a fully local deployment, documents, model inference, and outputs remain within your organization’s infrastructure.
These workflows do not require public-facing application endpoints or external AI APIs. They can operate in isolated environments configured for that purpose, reducing exposure associated with third-party processing and storage.
Workflow examples
Document processing for
financial workflows
Financial document processing requires accurate entity, period, and version identification. We build those checks into software that follows your reporting templates and review requirements.
Search engagement folders by document type, entity, and period, with links to original files and version exceptions.
Explore this workflowDocument registerCompany A · FY2025
Find in approved folders
Engagements / Company A
02_Financials
Company_A_CIM.pdf↗
FY2025_statements.pdf
Received / Sept
Company_A_CIM_v2.pdf↗
Operating_model.xlsx
Archive / FY2024
Company_A_CIM_2024.pdf
2 relevant sources
Company_A_CIM.pdf
Source selectedVersion unconfirmed
CIM_v2 identifies the same year. Its name alone does not establish which version to use.
Inspect original-file references
Illustrative paths. Authoritative files stay in place.
/Engagements/Company_A/02_Financials/Company_A_CIM.pdf
/Engagements/Company_A/Received/Sept/Company_A_CIM_v2.pdf
/Engagements/Company_A/02_Financials/FY2025_statements.pdf
Original files stay in placeAccess boundaries agreed with your team
Populate deal templates with extracted figures, source locations, and exceptions for review.
Explore this workflowCompany ADeal workbook
Your deal review template
CIM, page 24Revenue · 84.2
Your templateFinancials!F12
| Requested field | FY2025 | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 84.2 | CIM · p. 24 |
| Reported EBITDA | 12.6 | CIM · p. 25 |
| Adjusted EBITDA | Review | QoE · p. 18 |
Adjusted EBITDA is held for reviewConflicting adjustment totals. No value accepted.
Each mapped field keeps its reporting period, units, and source reference in the workbook.
Selected sources, with locations
- Revenue · 84.2
- Company_A_CIM.pdf · p. 24
- Reported EBITDA · 12.6
- Company_A_CIM.pdf · p. 25
- Adjusted EBITDA · 14.1 / 13.8
- Company_A_QoE.pdf · p. 18
Operating_model.xlsx · Financials!F18
CIM_v2 remains unconfirmed in the document register. It does not silently replace the selected source.
Confirm the adjustment bridge
Reported EBITDAAdjustments to confirm
QoE14.1
Model13.8
12.6 reported + 1.5 / 1.2 in adjustments. The bridge needs confirmation.
QoE · p. 1814.1
Model · Financials!F1813.8
QoE reports adjusted EBITDA of 14.1; the operating model shows 13.8. Confirm the adjustment bridge before using either figure.
Awaiting professional review. Neither figure is accepted into the workbook.
Compare company submissions in a consistent format while missing reports and unit differences stay visible.
Explore this workflowQuarterly portfolio reportingRevenue · USD millions
What changed this quarter?
Q1 2026Q2 2026
Company A / Q2 2026
Revenue increased from 20.4 to 21.8 USD million. Both periods are attached for the reviewer to check.
Company_A_Q1_2026.pdf · p. 3 / Company_A_Q2_2026.pdf · p. 3Inspect source references
- Company_A_Q1_2026.pdf · p. 3 / Company_A_Q2_2026.pdf · p. 3. Revenue increased from 20.4 to 21.8 USD million. Both periods are attached for the reviewer to check.
- Company_B_Q1_2026.xlsx · Summary!B8 / Company_B_Q2_2026.xlsx · Summary!B8. The Q2 submission reports 10,200 in USD thousands. The workbook uses USD millions, so conversion is held for confirmation.
- Company_C_Q1_2026.pdf · p. 2 / Q2 source not received. The Q2 submission has not been received. The previous period remains visible; no new revenue figure is filled in.
Draft reporting outputProfessional sign-off required
Connect the request list to the files received, so the team can see what is still outstanding.
Explore this workflowDiligence request trackerCompany A · Proposed updates
Request 01 / Received
The file matches the requested year. A proposed “received” status records delivery; the team still reviews the substance.
Prepared for reviewNo external messages sent
Illustrative workflows using sample data. Implementation is scoped to each firm’s requirements.
Development and ongoing support
Software maintenance
and support
Kairon provides workflow design, integration, deployment, and ongoing support. Maintenance includes agreed changes to reporting templates, document formats, and business rules, with priorities and release requirements established with your team.
01 / UnderstandDocument requirements
Files, review points, and the output your team needs.
02 / BuildValidate a working pilot
Representative documents, unusual cases, and agreed criteria.
03 / MaintainMaintain and support
Integration, support, and improvements within the agreed scope.
An example after launch
The quarterly template is mapped to the company reports.
TemplateRevenue + EBITDA
Software mappingAgreed fields mapped
ReviewCheck sourced output
Review and accountability
Source references
and professional review
We define access, data handling, and review requirements with your team before implementation.
The scope specifies permitted data sources, how results are delivered, and which decisions require professional approval.
Source references
Design outputs so reviewers can trace a figure to its file, period, and source location.
Exception reporting
Make missing information and conflicting figures visible at the point of review.
Output integration
Fit the output to the team’s templates and tools, with professional sign-off built into the process.
The economics of local AI
Local inference costs
Local inference uses your compute capacity without cloud-model API token charges.
Compare deployment approachesCloud API-based workflows incur model-provider usage charges, alongside any product fees. Kairon’s fully local deployments run models on client infrastructure, eliminating external model API charges for that processing.
Once the infrastructure is installed, additional processing uses available local capacity. For recurring, document-heavy workflows, this can reduce the cost of processing additional work.
Total costs include hardware, electricity, maintenance, and support. Savings depend on workload, utilization, hardware, and model requirements. Model quality and speed are evaluated against the requirements of each workflow.
Project inquiries
Discuss your requirements
Share an overview of your current process, data sources, and required outputs. We can assess the scope, integration requirements, and deployment options.