Two files, the analysis begins
The fund’s portfolio in XML and the manager’s letter: with both, the analysis begins — no intermediate spreadsheet.
Synapse for Allocators
Does the manager dowhat the letter says?
Point the fund at the folder where the custodian drops the statement and the manager drops the letter. The portfolio is reconciled before anything is read, what the letter claims is set against what the positions show, question by question, and the report goes to the committee. The AI interprets; it does not calculate: every figure comes from the statement or from a named public source.
- Nothing is published without your approval
- No conclusion without the evidence beside it
From the portfolio to the manager's letter, in one short video.
Two files that become an analysis, the numbers that must add up before any reading, the question-by-question test, and the report that only goes out with your approval.
Read what the video shows
- Fund Analysis: the portfolio vs. the letter. Send the fund's XML statement and the manager's letter: Synapse checks the net assets.
- Does the manager walk the talk? Letter × portfolio, question by question.
- Two files and analysis begins. Position statement in XML and manager's letter.
- Every month, no reminders needed. With Keep up to date, every new file gets analyzed.
- Before reading, it has to add up. Declared net assets × sum of positions: Net assets agree.
- A team of agents, step by step. From ingestion to supervision, each step inspectable.
- The AI interprets. It doesn't calculate. How this figure is built: file, rules or AI.
- What the letter says, what the fund holds. Question-by-question review, with both pieces of evidence.
- A score that shows its coverage. Score covers 88% of the script. No answer, no count.
- Three scenarios, one synthesis. Pessimistic, Realistic, Optimistic: weights you adjust.
- You approve. The committee gets it. Approve and publish releases the nine-page report.
- What the manager says. What the portfolio shows. Meet Synapse.
The eve of the committee, two ways.
Drag the line and see the difference between rebuilding the pack by hand and asking the question with both pieces of evidence on screen.
More funds analyzed, without multiplying analysts
The Funds module reconciles the portfolio and the manager’s letter, flags the discrepancies and leaves the questions ready for the analyst to review — the AI interprets; it does not calculate. Nothing is published without your sign-off.
Updates on its own, every month
With "Keep updated", each month’s new file becomes analysis — with no one having to remember.
The count closes first
Before reading, the NAV checks out: declared equity × sum of positions. If it doesn’t match, the screen says so.
Letter vs. portfolio
A question-by-question comparison of what the letter says and what the portfolio shows, with both pieces of evidence side by side.
How the number is made
Each number shows how it was made: from the file, from a rule or from the AI. The AI interprets; it does not calculate.
You approve, the committee receives
Approve and publish releases the nine-page report to the committee — nothing goes out without your sign-off.
From the custodian's file to the question the committee puts to the manager.
Every step happens on a screen you will meet after signing up, under the same name it carries in the menu.
The folder the month arrives in
Point the fund at the knowledge base folder where the custodian drops the statement and the manager drops the letter. When the month's file appears, it is recognised and the analysis runs on its own. What decides which is which is the file itself.
- Statements in the ANBIMA 4.01 layout and in XML 5.0 of the ISO 20022 standard, with nothing to convert first
- Manager letters in PDF, DOCX, TXT and Markdown, through the same door
- If whoever enabled the watch loses access to that folder, the source shows as unreachable instead of stopping in silence
The portfolio is checked before it is read
The net assets declared in the file are checked against the sum of the positions it lists. They are two independent routes to the same figure, and the analysis only carries on with them reconciled.
- A statement that does not add up is marked as not reconciled, with the divergence printed
- The divergence becomes an alert on the analysis instead of disappearing inside an average
- The tolerance is your own parameter, and every analysis keeps the configuration that was in force when it ran
The arithmetic, not only the result
The other tabs show the aggregate; Risk lines shows the arithmetic. Every position appears with its maturity, the rate that was used and the rate risk that came out of it, grouped by maturity bucket, with the duration and the multiplied value in plain sight so you can redo the sum by hand.
- Duration, multiplied value and discount factor printed under each line
- A rate taken from the fallback rather than the collected curve is marked as an assumption
- The reconciliation strip adds the lines up two independent ways and says so in red when they disagree
Every public indicator, with its provenance
The market data screen shows the series the analysis consults and where each one came from. A source that answered in full reads differently from a source that fell short, and the second is never presented as the first.
- BACEN, CVM, Tesouro Transparente and IBGE, each with the collector that brought it and the date of the observation
- ANBIMA's yield curve needs no credential; the index feed is contracted and waits for yours
- Partial collection is said out loud: the report records which source fell short and by how much
What the letter says, against what the portfolio shows
The script ships ready and it is yours: the questions, the weight of each one and the bands are all configurable. Every line carries the verdict and both pieces of evidence, the quoted passage from the letter on one side and the computed figure from the portfolio on the other.
- Four possible verdicts: confirms, partial, contradicts and no evidence
- A question the letter does not answer stays out of the denominator, and the coverage is printed beside the number
- The score is an invitation to look, never a verdict on the fund
Nobody publishes alone
The analysis ends waiting for your approval. While nobody approves, the document is stamped as a draft; a reviewer sends a stage back with the reason, and the reason stays with the analysis for the next run to read.
- Report, alerts and questions for the manager only exist after a person signs off
- A nine page report in the reader's language, carrying your firm's visual identity
- Nothing is filed away: the report is built from the fund's live data every time it is opened
From the first statement to the first approved report.
- 1
Point at the folder
The folder where the custodian drops the statement and the manager drops the letter. Or drag this month's two files in, if you would rather start with a single fund.
- 2
The portfolio is checked
The declared net assets are set against the sum of the positions before anything is read, and what does not add up is flagged instead of slipping through.
- 3
You approve
Read the confrontation question by question, send it back with the reason if something did not convince you, and publish the report for the committee when it does.
One door, bought whole.
The edition for allocators and fund selectors brings fund analysis and everything that comes with every door: chat, projects, the knowledge base and your business context.
Funds
For whoever answers for a shelf of funds
You see the amount before confirming any charge.
- Statements in ANBIMA 4.01 and XML 5.0 of the ISO 20022 standard, letters in PDF, DOCX, TXT and Markdown
- Declared net assets checked against the sum of the positions before any reading
- Question by question confrontation, with the letter's passage and the portfolio's figure side by side
- Rate risk position by position, with the maturity, the rate used and the arithmetic in plain sight
- Three scenarios debated and a synthesis weighing all three, always recomputed in the engine
- A nine page report in Portuguese, English and Spanish, carrying your visual identity
- Public indicators from BACEN, CVM, ANBIMA, Tesouro Transparente and IBGE, each with its provenance
- Human review: report, alerts and questions for the manager only go out with approval
No lock-in. Cancel whenever you like and keep using it until the end of the paid period.
Why a committee can take this to the table.
- The AI interprets; it does not calculateEvery figure comes from the statement or from a named public source. The agents receive the numbers already computed and write the reading; they never derive, estimate or round a figure again. A figure that does not exist is reported as unavailable, not filled in.
- Partial collection is said, not smoothed overWhen a source fails, the report says which one and how much was missing, instead of presenting the rest as if it were the whole.
- Nobody publishes aloneReport, alerts and questions for the manager wait for a person to sign off. A reviewer sends it back with the reason, and the reason stays with the analysis.
- A score that could not be assessed is not a zeroA question the letter does not answer leaves the denominator, and when nothing could be assessed the platform shows a dash on every screen. The score measures whether the letter and the portfolio say the same thing, not the quality of the fund.
On TVBluey, the company behind Synapse, on Globo NSC's TECH SC, in the report on financial planning and longevity featuring the Elos caseWatch Bluey on TECH SC, Globo's technology programme, on financial planning and longevity, from 5:50
Elos released the name and the context, and not the figures: coverage, analyst hours and any measure of results appear neither here nor on any other page of this site.
What a committee asks before adopting it.
What format does the statement have to be in?
The two the market uses today: the ANBIMA 4.01 layout and XML 5.0 of the ISO 20022 standard. The manager's letter comes in PDF, DOCX, TXT or Markdown. There is nothing to convert first, and both come in through the same door.
What if the statement does not add up?
The net assets declared in the file are checked against the sum of the positions before anything is read. If the difference exceeds your tolerance, the statement is marked as not reconciled, the divergence is printed and it becomes an alert on the analysis, instead of entering the arithmetic in silence.
Does the score say whether the fund is good?
No. It measures one thing: whether what the letter claims and what the portfolio shows say the same thing. It is not a quality grade, not a verdict and not investment advice. The same portfolio and the same letter, read twice, do not always produce the same verdicts, which is exactly why every conclusion comes with the evidence from both sides for you to check.
And when the letter does not answer the question?
The question stays out of the denominator, and the coverage is printed beside the number to qualify what it covers. When nothing could be assessed, because the letter is absent or silent on every theme, the platform shows a dash and the not-assessed mark on the dossier, the list, the history and the report.
Where does the public data come from?
From BACEN, CVM, ANBIMA, Tesouro Transparente and IBGE, and the screen shows which collector brought each figure and the date of the observation. ANBIMA's yield curve needs no credential; the index feed is a contracted source and stays pending until you configure your own credential.
Do I have to remember to upload a file every month?
Not if you point the fund at the folder the statement and the letter arrive in. When the month's file appears there, it is recognised and the analysis runs on its own. The watch sees with the eyes of whoever enabled it: if that person loses access to the folder, the source shows as unreachable instead of stopping in silence.
Can I point the fund at a Data Lake table?
It can be watched, but today it is only detected: nobody has declared which column is the asset, which is the quantity and which is the price, so it does not become a portfolio. The sweep says so instead of staying quiet. A knowledge base folder works end to end.
Do you audit the fund's expenses?
No. The costs shown are the ones the statement itself provisions, not an audit of expenses. The net assets and costs page reports the net assets and what they cost; it does not break the variation down into causes.
Who decides the questions, the weights and the bands?
You do. The script ships switched on and everything in it is configurable: the questions, the weight of each one, the value of each verdict and the score bands. Whoever configures the module also reads on screen, in full, the instructions each agent works under.
Is this investment advice?
No, and it is not consultancy. The product confronts and evidences: it shows what the letter said, what the portfolio shows and where the two disagree. The decision is the committee's.
This month's letter has arrived. So has the portfolio.
Point at the folder, let the check run, and take the question by question confrontation to the committee, with the evidence from both sides.
Review a fund