Procurement Glossary
Objective invoice verification: definition, methods, and significance in Procurement
November 19, 2025
Substantive invoice verification is a key control process in Procurement that checks the accuracy of supplier invoices. It ensures that ordered goods and services have actually been delivered and meet the agreed specifications. Read on to find out what substantive invoice verification involves, what methods are used, and how it contributes to cost control.
Key Facts
- Checking the accuracy of invoices before payment
- Reconciliation between order, delivery, and invoice (three-way match)
- Reduces payment errors and prevents unjustified expenses
- An integral part of the purchase-to-pay process
- Basis for discount optimization and supplier evaluation
Contents
Definition: Factual audit
The factual invoice verification involves the systematic review of incoming supplier invoices to ensure that their content is correct and complete.
Core elements of substantive testing
The following aspects are checked during the factual audit:
- Consistency of invoice items with the order
- Accuracy of the quantities and specifications delivered
- Compliance with agreed prices and terms and conditions
- Completeness of delivery according to incoming goods inspection
Distinction from mathematical verification
While the mathematical check verifies mathematical correctness, the factual check focuses on the substantive validity of the invoice. It usually takes place before the mathematical check and forms the basis for invoice approval.
Importance in the purchasing process
Objective invoice verification is essential for cost control and prevents unjustified payments. It supports account assignment and enables precise budget monitoring in procurement.
Methods and procedures
The factual audit is carried out using structured procedures that ensure systematic and complete control.
Three-way match procedure
The most proven method is the three-way comparison between the order, proof of delivery, and invoice. All three documents are checked for consistency:
- Quantity comparison between order and delivery
- Price comparison with the agreed terms and conditions
- Specification check of the delivered items
Digital test methods
Modern e-procurement systems automate large parts of the factual check. They automatically compare invoice data with orders and flag discrepancies for manual post-processing.
Sampling procedure
When invoice volumes are high, random checks are often carried out. Invoices are selected according to risk categories, suppliers, or value limits and checked thoroughly, while standard invoices are processed automatically.
Tacto Intelligence
Combines deep procurement knowledge with the most powerful AI agents for strong Procurement.
Key KPIs for substantive audits
Key figures for substantive auditing enable the evaluation of process efficiency and the quality of controls.
Examination rate and processing time
The audit rate measures the proportion of invoices that have been factually audited in relation to the total volume. The average processing time from invoice receipt to approval indicates the efficiency of the process:
- Target audit rate: >95% for critical suppliers
- Durchlaufzeit: <3 Tage für Standardrechnungen
- Degree of automation: >70% for routine calculations
Error detection rate
This key figure shows how many incorrect invoices are identified by the substantive check. A high rate indicates effective control mechanisms, but can also point to quality problems with suppliers.
Cost savings through testing
The monetary value of prevented incorrect payments justifies the expense of factual verification. Typical savings amount to 0.5-2% of the verified invoice volume through error correction and discount optimization.
Risk factors and controls in substantive audits
Inadequate factual auditing can lead to significant financial losses and compliance issues.
Incorrect payments
Inadequate verification processes lead to unjustified payments for undelivered or defective goods. Incomplete verification results in considerable additional costs, particularly in the case of complex service invoices.
Compliance risks
Inadequate documentation of factual checks can lead to objections during audits and tax inspections. The dual control principle is therefore essential for critical invoices.
Litigation risks
Missing workflow rules can lead to delays in the payment process and jeopardize cash discount benefits. Unclear responsibilities between Procurement specialist departments further exacerbate these risks.
.avif)
Practical example
A mechanical engineering company implements digital factual invoice verification for maintenance services. The system automatically compares incoming invoices with maintenance orders and service reports. In the case of a monthly invoice for €15,000 for plant maintenance, the system detects a discrepancy: according to the service log, only 80% of the planned maintenance work was carried out. The factual check prevents an overpayment of €3,000 and initiates clarification with the service provider.
- Automatic reconciliation between order and service record
- Early detection of quantity and performance deviations
- Structured clarification with suppliers in case of discrepancies
Current developments and effects
The factual audit is continuously being developed through technological innovations and changed business processes.
AI-supported invoice verification
Artificial intelligence is revolutionizing factual invoice verification through automatic pattern recognition and anomaly detection. Machine learning algorithms identify suspicious invoice items and learn from historical audit results.
real-time integration
Modern systems enable real-time linking of purchase-to-pay processes with ERP systems. This means that factual checks are carried out automatically as soon as the invoice is received, which significantly reduces processing times.
Mobile approval processes
Mobile approval enables departments to perform factual checks even when they are away from the office. This speeds up approval processes and improves cash discount utilization through faster invoice processing.
Conclusion
Objective invoice verification is an indispensable control mechanism in modern Procurement, preventing unjustified payments and increasing cost transparency. Digitalization and AI support make it more efficient and accurate without replacing the necessary human expertise in complex matters. Companies that establish structured verification processes reduce financial risks and optimize their procurement costs in the long term.
FAQ
What distinguishes factual auditing from mathematical auditing?
The factual check verifies the validity of the invoice content—whether goods were delivered and services rendered. The mathematical check verifies mathematical correctness, such as totals, VAT, and cash discounts. Both checks complement each other in the invoice approval process.
Who is responsible for auditing the accounts?
Responsibility usually lies with the requesting department, which can assess the delivery or service. Procurement with price and condition checks. Clear rules on responsibilities and the dual control principle for critical invoices are essential.
How can factual auditing be automated?
Automation is achieved through digital reconciliation of orders, goods receipts, and invoices. E-procurement systems automatically detect standard deviations and only forward critical cases for manual review. AI systems continuously improve the detection rate.
What documentation is required for the substantive review?
The test results, tester, test date, and any deviations with their clarification must be documented. This evidence is required for compliance and audits. Digital systems create this documentation automatically and in an audit-proof manner.
.png)
.png)
.png)
