Your PMS manages portfolios. Who supervises what requires attention?

Amrachi isn't arguing that Portfolio Management Systems are inadequate. Quite the opposite — PMSs are essential infrastructure that wealth managers depend on. Amrachi addresses a different workflow that PMSs weren't designed to handle.

What your PMS does exceptionally well

Portfolio Management Systems (Expersoft, Avaloq, Temenos, Addepar, and others) were built to manage the core data layer of wealth management:

• Position tracking and valuation across asset classes and custodians
• Transaction processing, booking, and reconciliation
• Performance calculation, attribution, and benchmarking
• Client reporting (statements, performance reviews, factsheets)
• Regulatory reporting (MiFID II, FINMA, FCA disclosures)
• Portfolio analytics and risk metrics

These capabilities are mature, deeply integrated into operations, and represent years of institutional investment. No wealth manager should replace them.

Where a PMS may stop — and supervision begins

A PMS tracks what you hold. It was not primarily designed to track whether you have reviewed it — or what was decided.

Depending on vendor and configuration, a standard PMS typically:

• May not surface which client portfolios require attention today, ranked by client impact
• Typically does not maintain a dedicated supervision queue with named review ownership and SLA tracking
• Typically does not capture who reviewed a situation, when, and why, as a structured primary workflow
• May not record the rationale behind a supervision decision as an attributable, permanent record
• Typically does not produce a tamper-evident supervision evidence trail accessible to auditors independently
• Typically does not give a CIO real-time visibility into firm-wide supervision coverage and gaps

These are not criticisms — supervision coverage and decision recording are a different workflow, addressing a different management question than portfolio accounting.

Capability comparison

"Varies" indicates that some PMS products include partial versions of these capabilities. Depth and auditability vary significantly by vendor and configuration.

PMS + Amrachi — not PMS or Amrachi

Amrachi reads from your PMS data — typically via CSV export from your custodian or PMS — and adds the supervision workflow layer above. The two systems address complementary workflows, not the same workflow.

When a prospect says "we already have Expersoft" or "we run Avaloq" — Amrachi isn't competing with it. It adds the supervision discipline above the portfolio data that the PMS manages.

The management question your PMS doesn't answer

A significant market move affects dozens of client portfolios. Can you immediately see:

• which clients were materially affected and by how much;
• who was responsible for reviewing them;
• which reviews remain outstanding;
• what decisions were made; and
• whether any supervision gaps remain?

Your PMS remains the system of record for portfolio data — positions, valuations, performance. Amrachi adds the workflow for answering those supervision questions, and a permanent record that the answers were produced.