Accounting risk, measured. Not guessed. In hours, not weeks.
See how it works“AI-powered fraud detection” usually means a document in and a summary out, or a clever prompt with a skill bolted on. Lynx is built the other way round: more than 200 models built in house on years of academic and practitioner research run first, as code; generative AI only explains what they found.
It applies the methods forensic accountants, short sellers and accounting researchers use to assess accounting quality and detect manipulation and fraud: it reads your filings, extracts every figure with its page, runs those models to compute 166 indicators, benchmarks them against the company’s peers, and only then writes a cited report you can question.
Who uses Lynx
Anyone whose decision rests on someone else’s financial statements. The study is the same; what changes is the question you bring to it.
Asset managers
Screen a watchlist or a portfolio each reporting season. Rank holdings by accounting risk, see what moved since last year, and take the page-cited findings into the investment committee.
Family offices
Diligence on a private deal from the CIM and management accounts you were sent, before the advisers are engaged. A rating, the findings and what the documents do not print.
Funds
Test a long thesis or build a short one. Every indicator against the peer group, restatement history laid bare, and Research to interrogate the filing line by line.
Regulators and supervisors
Decide which filings deserve a second look. Consistent, repeatable screening across issuers, with the reasoning and the page for each flag, and a data-quality reading for each study.
Also used by transaction-advisory practices, credit and counterparty-risk teams, forensic accountants and independent analysts.
Three finished reports, before you upload anything
Three finished studies on fictitious companies, published whole: one rated, one where the rating was withheld, one where the filings did not print enough to score. Every tab a real study has, page citations included.
Atlantis Semiconductor Ltd FY2021–FY2025
Aggressive but disclosed choices, cash consistent with profit. Where judgement starts, and what a rating rests on.
Open the sampleAvalon Telematics Ltd FY2020–FY2026
Too little of the analysis could be computed from these filings, so the rating is withheld and the report says which figures would restore it.
Open the sampleLyonesse Logistics FY2024
A teaser that never prints the primary statements. What a study publishes when it cannot score, and what to upload instead.
Open the sampleHow a study runs
Every number is computed by code and checked against the page it was read from. Models read, judge and write; they never produce a figure.
3,690kept apart
Three readings move together across the last three years: inventory growing ahead of sales, the provision held against slow-moving parts falling, and development spending moving from the income statement to the balance sheet.
“Three readings move in the same direction across three years, and each of them is a judgement management makes rather than a figure the market sets.”
Inventory grew by a fifth while sales grew by six per cent, and the provision held against slow-moving parts was cut by more than two thirds in the same year; development spending moved from the income statement to the balance sheet at the same time, capitalised at half again the charge taken to expense.
Development capitalised in the closing year is half again the charge taken to the income statement, and the research expense beside it has not moved in three years. The policy is disclosed and the useful life is stated; what changed is how much of the spend sits on the balance sheet. 1
Operating cash covers reported profit in every year 2
Note 11. Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost and net realisable value. Inventory rose to 1,088 million from 902 million while sales grew by six per cent, and the provision held against slow-moving parts fell from 3.1 per cent of the balance to 0.9 per cent.
Note 12. Development costs
Development costs of 612 million were capitalised in the year, against research and development expense of 214 million charged to the income statement. The group capitalises development expenditure once the recognition criteria are met and amortises it over four years.
In hours, not weeks.
While the player has focus: Space plays or pauses, ← and → change scene. A chapter jumps to its scene.
Not a PDF dropped into a chatbot
Everything below runs before a single sentence of the report is written, and none of it is done by language models.
The methods, not a black box
More than 200 models built in house, from the published research on accounting quality, manipulation and fraud, the tests forensic accountants run, and the patterns short sellers write up. Their 166 indicators are grouped into 14 categories; each one you can open in your study.
Accruals and earnings quality
Discretionary and abnormal accruals, accrual quality and persistence, earnings smoothing, accruals against cash from operations.
Real-activities manipulation
Production, discretionary-spending and sales patterns that move reported margins without moving the business.
Distress and manipulation composites
The bankruptcy-risk, manipulation-detection and financial-strength composites, in the variants that fit listed and private companies.
Digit conformity
Whether the filed figures follow the leading-digit distribution that unmanipulated data follows, year by year, and where they depart from it.
Asset, cash and working-capital quality
Soft assets, goodwill movements, capitalised costs, non-cash items in operating cash flow, receivable and inventory days against peers.
Gearing, credit and governance
Leverage and refinancing pressure, interest cover, audit fees and opinions, options and insider signals.
Growth, margins and valuation
Where growth outruns cash, where margins move against the peer group, what the market price implies, and how capital spending follows.
8 red-flag typologies
Read from the text: revenue recognition, expense capitalisation, reserves, related parties, off-balance-sheet items, cash-flow classification, non-GAAP measures, going concern. Quoted with the page.
What you get for every study
Every figure, with its page
Both the reported and the restated series, kept apart. Hover a cell for the quote; click for the page.
A rating per fiscal year
A+ to F on a benchmarked risk index, and withheld when the filings do not print enough to support one.
Findings you can verify
Severity, year, the quoted passage and the page. 8 red-flag typologies read from the text.
Research that cites
Ask across one study or several. Out of scope is refused visibly. Answers come with the page.
Pricing
Pay as you go. Add credits: a completed study draws a fixed study fee plus the tokens it uses, a Research question its tokens alone, shown to the cent before and after. New accounts start with $100.00 of free credits: enough for a study of a single filing and a dozen Research questions.
- $100.00 of free credits to start, no card
- Add credits from $25.00; valid for 6 months
- An estimate before every run, the exact cost after it; Research metered per question at the same token rate, no fee
- Everything included; unlimited members in a workspace, one set of credits
- A run that fails, stops before scoring or withholds its rating is not charged
- Invoice billing and committed volume rates
- Single sign-on, dedicated data region, custom retention
- API access and screening across many issuers
- A named contact and a security review on your paper
Typical studies: a 22-page information memorandum about $44 · two annual reports, 150 pages, about $106 · six annual reports, 437 pages, about $245. A worked example