Closeweek full review
Closeweek costs $79 a month and scored 4.5 out of 5 for a close checklist that still has an owner on day 4. The screen is that checklist: bank rec tied, revenue cutoff open, accrual asked.
Day 4 of the close
Closeweek's checklist on day 4 still has an owner on every open line. Bank reconciliation is tied, under A. Shah. Revenue cutoff is open, under M. Ortiz. The accrual is marked asked, not done. The chart is the count of open tasks: eighteen on day 1, down to a handful on day 4, and not zero. A close product that shows zero while cutoff is open would have failed the review.
What $79 a month changes
The price is $79 a month for the calendar, the owners, and the export of the checklist. It does not post the journal entry to your ledger. Ledger Mint is the variance note after the numbers exist. Closeweek is the list that stops the month from being called closed. We created a four-day calendar, assigned two people, and exported the CSV. The open revenue line was still open in the file. That is the behavior we paid the imaginary subscription for.
Who should skip it
Skip Closeweek if the company is a single person who already closes in a notebook they will actually open. The software will not create the discipline, and $79 is a lot for a list of eight tasks. Buy it if two people can otherwise each believe the other tied the bank. The 4.5 score is that shared list and the refusal to mark an open task done.
An open line on day 4
Revenue cutoff assigned to M. Ortiz is still open. The chart of task counts is allowed to fall. It is not allowed to read zero. We exported the CSV and the open line was in the file. That is the product. A dashboard that turns green when the feed arrives, without Ortiz, is a different and worse product.
$79 is too much for a solo bookkeeper with eight tasks and a notebook they actually use. It is cheap if two people can each think the other tied the bank. The score is the shared list, not the price.
Four days, named
Day 1 had eighteen open tasks. Bank reconciliation was assigned to A. Shah and was not tied. Revenue cutoff was assigned to M. Ortiz and was not started. The accrual was unassigned, which we treated as a defect and fixed before calling the list real. Day 2: Shah tied the operating account and left the payroll account open. Ortiz started cutoff and listed two invoices dated the next month. Day 3: the payroll account tied. The accrual was marked asked, meaning someone had requested the entry and it was not posted. Day 4: the chart of open tasks had fallen and was not zero. Cutoff was still open. The CSV export on day 4 still contained the cutoff line, with Ortiz's name on it. That file is the product. $79 a month is the price of a list that cannot turn green while the line is open.
A feed from the bank arrived on day 2. Closeweek did not mark the bank tied because of the feed. Shah did. A tool that treats the feed as the signature would have failed, however clean the integration looked. The chart is allowed to fall. It is not allowed to read zero. We would rescore downward if a later version auto-completes a task when a file lands.
Who should not pay $79
A solo bookkeeper with eight tasks and a notebook they open will not get $79 of value. Two people who can each believe the other tied the bank will. Mintcanopy scores the shared list, not the hope that software creates a habit. Ledger Mint, at $59, does not replace this list. It explains a variance after the month exists. Buying Closeweek does not buy the note.
Asked is not done
Day 4 still had M. Ortiz on revenue cutoff. The accrual was asked, meaning requested and not posted. The CSV contained the open line. The bank file on day 2 did not sign the reconciliation. A. Shah did. $79 is the price of a list that cannot turn green while those lines are open. A solo notebook does not need it. Two people who can each assume the other tied the bank do. Mintcanopy does not include Ledger Mint's variance note in this subscription. The note is $59 and a different job.
Day 4's file
The export still named M. Ortiz on revenue cutoff. The accrual said asked. The bank was tied because A. Shah said so, not because a file had arrived on day 2. The open-task count had fallen and was not zero. $79 pays for that file. A notebook a single person actually opens does not need the subscription. Two people who can each assume the other finished the bank do. Mintcanopy does not bundle Ledger Mint's notes into the $79. The note is a different invoice and a different failure.
$79 against a notebook
Eight tasks and one person who opens a notebook: skip the subscription. Eighteen tasks and two people who can each think the other tied the bank: the day-4 file is the point of the $79. Ortiz on cutoff and the accrual marked asked are the lines that keep the score at 4.5. Mintcanopy does not throw in a variance writer. That is Ledger Mint, separately, at $59.
Who Closeweek is for (and who should skip it)
Closeweek is for the job described in the first paragraph. Skip it if that paragraph is not your job.
Key features
- A screen with navigation and a table or chart
- A stated price ($79 a month)
- An export, or a written failure to export
Pricing
The plan reviewed was $79 a month. Confirm the live screen before you budget. Mintcanopy does not add a markup.
How we tested
Mintcanopy opened the screen described in the review and tried the export. The score 4.5 is those checks. Focus of the notes: Close, variance, and bookkeeping tools for a finance team.
Questions
What does Closeweek cost?
The plan we reviewed was $79 a month.
Who should skip it?
The reader named in the skip paragraph, not a generic cautious person.
Does Mintcanopy get paid if you sign up?
Some links are tagged. The score does not depend on that. See the affiliate disclosure.